Edward Irving;s Historicism

[Biblewriter]

It has been alleged that Darby got his dispensatinal ideas from the "Preliminary Discourse," prefixed to Edward Irving's translation of Lacunza's book, "The coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty. And to prove that claim, it has been pointed out that Darby was still holding Historicism in 1829, a full two years after Irving published his preliminary discourse. There can be zero question that Darby did indeed read Irving's discourse, for he commented on its contents. But, without a single exception,every comment Darby made about this paper was a condemnation, not an endorsement.

And Edward Irving's 1827 "Preliminary Discourse taught Historicism, rather than dispensationalism.

(all the page numbers given here are as shown in the PDF file to which BABerean2 repeatedly posted links.)

Irving said:

“Now it was this very thing, —that our author perceived not the symbolical meaning of this period ‘time, times, and half a time,’ but interpreted it literally, to mean three years and a half; or forty and two months, or 1260 days, —which led him into his whole theory of this vision, or as he modestly proposeth it, his conjecture. Having fallen into this error, which I can only account for from his total unacquaintance with any of our protestant interpreters, it was quite natural for him to find infidelity represented in this beast of ten horns which is to consummate the wickedness of the last times, and bring in the glorious advent of the Lord. Because he is too shrewd an observer of the spirit and aspects of human society to doubt that it is infidelity which is to play the last desperate game of wickedness; yea, not to perceive that it is already doing its work masterfully, and hath been for the last thirty years. I am perfectly amazed at his insight into this mystery; the concurrence of such a man to the opinions which I have expressed in ‘Babylon and Infidelity foredoomed,’ concerning the imminent peril of infidelity, may, I think, open the eyes of those who dream that religion is making great and mighty progress upon the earth. Being fully convinced of this point, and perceiving that this ten horned beast was to consummate the mystery of iniquity, and not perceiving the emblematical character of its period, it was most natural, and as it were necessary for him to conclude that this ten-horned seven-headed beast must be an emblem of infidelity; and having arrived at this conclusion, it was most natural, and as it were necessary, to infer that the other three must likewise represent false religions, and so we have the clue to this interpretation also.
“Now I am not ignorant that there are amongst ourselves men who doubt and disbelieve the interpretation which almost all protestants give to this period, as containing a term of 1260 years; and that of late a pamphlet has been written by a very worthy clergyman of the Church of England to this effect: but really I have thought this matter so completely set at rest by Mede, and Henry More, and the common consent of those who have written since, as not to need any demonstration. And it is manifest that, if in emblematical visions, such as those of Daniel and the Apocalypse, you will interpret the periods literally, you may as well interpret the other parts literally; and insist upon literal beasts of the character there set forth, and a literal throne, and so of the rest, which no one will be so foolish as to require. And why require it in one part and not in another? The word time, rather than year; and times, rather than two years; and the dividing of time, rather than half a year; were evidence to me that there was a mystery under it: but when I find it in the midst of an emblematical vision I can have no doubt thereof, according to all rules and canons of interpretation.
“This indeed is the point in which our author falls short of himself, viz: in all that respects the chronology which is intermingled with the prophecy, whereof he makes not the slightest use in guiding himself with respect to our present place in the prophetic chart, but simply looks upon all the numbers 1260, 1290, and 1335 days, as determining the duration of the great and awful era which precedes the coming of the Lord.” (Pp. 20-21)

And he said:

“Still I go hand in hand with him in the idea, that it is to the revelation or manifestation of Jesus Christ, that every part should be shown to have respect. And if this idea be true, and the question of its truth must be determined on other grounds besides analogy, we have the best reason to assign why there should be so much disputation and disagreement among the interpreters of this book. For as it would have been bad husbandry to have given to Moses what fitted the times of Isaiah, or to Isaiah what suited the times of Daniel, or to Daniel what suited the times of the Baptist; so, would it have been equally bad husbandry to have opened the prophecy which respecteth the downfall of the Papacy to the Church while suffering under Paganism, or that which respecteth the downfall of Infidelity to the Church while suffering under the oppression of the Papacy: but rather to open unto each that which concerned its own trial, and in mercy to hide the various trials which were to follow, lest haply she might think them interminable, and lose heart altogether. Yet as in the former prophets of the old dispensation there is an infantine discernment, and, as it were, embryo revelation of all the prophecy which was to follow, so ought there to be a system, and combination, and evenness of progress and end in this book, which was thus gradually to be opened, as the Church should stand in need of its consolation. Thus, concurring with my author in the germ of his system, I concur with him so far in its spirit likewise as to believe, that, as upon the eve of Messiah’s former coming there was the dispensation of a fore runner and a preparation; so, upon the eve of his latter coming there may be, nay, there will be, a dispensation of special preparation and perhaps, even of a forerunner; which, I think, is signified in that prophetic voice announced under the sixth vial, ‘Behold, I come,’ &c. —Finally, it is enough for the confirmation of these views to find that each of the three great oppressions of the Church, the Pagan, the Papal, and the Infidel, was attended with a corresponding opening and understanding of that part of this book which severally concerneth each, and of the corresponding scriptures, which breathe the promise of the like deliverances. And this, I assert, has been the case: during the first three centuries, the Apocalypse was known and cherished in the Church as the great assurance of the downfall of Paganism; during the sufferings of the Waldenses and the Protestants, it was cherished as the ground of belief, that the Pope and the papal empire was the beast: and now it is beginning to be known from the same, that the infidel antichrist, who is to take the other out of the way, is the great sign of, and shall himself be destroyed in, the coming of the Lord.” (Pp. 22-23)

Again, he said:

“But would it reconcile them, would it enable us to hold the millennium, and be tremblingly alive to the uncertainty of the Lord’s coming, if we were to forego our system and adopt yours? Most certainly it would. But have not you also times determined, before which the Saviour is not to come? Yes; but these times and seasons the Father hath reserved in his own power. But are they not written in the scripture? They are written in the scripture, but hidden under such veils, as to have been completely shut up, until the time the Father shall be pleased by his Spirit to take off the veil which covereth them. But have you not sought to interpret them? We have sought, as Daniel did, to search into these prophetic numbers, but no one had ascertained the exact accomplishment of the great leading one, until the mighty events which fell out upon its accomplishment informed us that it was come to an end. So that these numbers did in no way, in past times, produce upon us the same effect which the millennium doth upon you, to cast forward, till after a fixed interval, our Lord’s coming, which we should look for daily. And now that the period of 1260 years is accomplished, and the period of 1290 also, are you not still expecting certain events prior to his appearing? Yes ever since we discovered the 1260 years to be accomplished, we have been observing the series of events which are to run, before our Lord’s coming, and we do expect certain events, such as the destruction of the Antichristian powers, and the spiritual vocation of Israel. Do not these then act upon you as the millennium doth upon us, to hinder and prevent that constant expectancy by which you set so much store, and which appeareth to have been the condition of the primitive church? No. They act upon us exactly as the forerunners of a king, the out-riders of his state, act upon the city which he is visiting. We are living amongst the signs of our Lord’s coming, we have seen six, and we are waiting for the seventh and last; we are lifting up our heads and stretching out our necks with expectation, we are all activity to get the house in order for the master whose avant-couriers have come in, we are all upon the way-side looking out for the Judge whose six precursors have arrived, we are all furnished with lamps, lest the bridegroom come in the night, and lo, though we be weighed down with slumber our loins are girt, and when the sound is heard, He cometh! lo, we are ready. And thus it cometh to pass, from the Lord’s not having broken the seal of those mysterious numbers until the years of omen were arrived, and the signs began to be given, that we were kept all the while of the mystery expecting his coming, and we were brought out of that state at once into the state of seeing the signs of his coming.” (Pp. 35-36)

Irving also devoted the major part of pages 26 through 28 to advancing this same doctrine, and mentioned it again on page 124. Yet the very man that claimed he had studied this paper in detail was totally unaware that Irving was teaching Historicism in this discourse.

 

[BABerean2]

It has been alleged that Darby got his dispensatinal ideas from the "Preliminary Discourse," prefixed to Edward Irving's translation of Lacunza's book, "The coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty. And to prove that claim, it has been pointed out that Darby was still holding Historicism in 1829, a full two years after Irving published his preliminary discourse. There can be zero question that Darby did indeed read Irving's discourse, for he commented on its contents. But, without a single exception,every comment Darby made about this paper was a condemnation, not an endorsement.

And Edward Irving's 1827 "Preliminary Discourse taught Historicism, rather than dispensationalism.

(all the page numbers given here are as shown in the PDF file to which BABerean2 repeatedly posted links.)

Irving said:

“Now it was this very thing, —that our author perceived not the symbolical meaning of this period ‘time, times, and half a time,’ but interpreted it literally, to mean three years and a half; or forty and two months, or 1260 days, —which led him into his whole theory of this vision, or as he modestly proposeth it, his conjecture. Having fallen into this error, which I can only account for from his total unacquaintance with any of our protestant interpreters, it was quite natural for him to find infidelity represented in this beast of ten horns which is to consummate the wickedness of the last times, and bring in the glorious advent of the Lord. Because he is too shrewd an observer of the spirit and aspects of human society to doubt that it is infidelity which is to play the last desperate game of wickedness; yea, not to perceive that it is already doing its work masterfully, and hath been for the last thirty years. I am perfectly amazed at his insight into this mystery; the concurrence of such a man to the opinions which I have expressed in ‘Babylon and Infidelity foredoomed,’ concerning the imminent peril of infidelity, may, I think, open the eyes of those who dream that religion is making great and mighty progress upon the earth. Being fully convinced of this point, and perceiving that this ten horned beast was to consummate the mystery of iniquity, and not perceiving the emblematical character of its period, it was most natural, and as it were necessary for him to conclude that this ten-horned seven-headed beast must be an emblem of infidelity; and having arrived at this conclusion, it was most natural, and as it were necessary, to infer that the other three must likewise represent false religions, and so we have the clue to this interpretation also.
“Now I am not ignorant that there are amongst ourselves men who doubt and disbelieve the interpretation which almost all protestants give to this period, as containing a term of 1260 years; and that of late a pamphlet has been written by a very worthy clergyman of the Church of England to this effect: but really I have thought this matter so completely set at rest by Mede, and Henry More, and the common consent of those who have written since, as not to need any demonstration. And it is manifest that, if in emblematical visions, such as those of Daniel and the Apocalypse, you will interpret the periods literally, you may as well interpret the other parts literally; and insist upon literal beasts of the character there set forth, and a literal throne, and so of the rest, which no one will be so foolish as to require. And why require it in one part and not in another? The word time, rather than year; and times, rather than two years; and the dividing of time, rather than half a year; were evidence to me that there was a mystery under it: but when I find it in the midst of an emblematical vision I can have no doubt thereof, according to all rules and canons of interpretation.
“This indeed is the point in which our author falls short of himself, viz: in all that respects the chronology which is intermingled with the prophecy, whereof he makes not the slightest use in guiding himself with respect to our present place in the prophetic chart, but simply looks upon all the numbers 1260, 1290, and 1335 days, as determining the duration of the great and awful era which precedes the coming of the Lord.” (Pp. 20-21)

And he said:

“Still I go hand in hand with him in the idea, that it is to the revelation or manifestation of Jesus Christ, that every part should be shown to have respect. And if this idea be true, and the question of its truth must be determined on other grounds besides analogy, we have the best reason to assign why there should be so much disputation and disagreement among the interpreters of this book. For as it would have been bad husbandry to have given to Moses what fitted the times of Isaiah, or to Isaiah what suited the times of Daniel, or to Daniel what suited the times of the Baptist; so, would it have been equally bad husbandry to have opened the prophecy which respecteth the downfall of the Papacy to the Church while suffering under Paganism, or that which respecteth the downfall of Infidelity to the Church while suffering under the oppression of the Papacy: but rather to open unto each that which concerned its own trial, and in mercy to hide the various trials which were to follow, lest haply she might think them interminable, and lose heart altogether. Yet as in the former prophets of the old dispensation there is an infantine discernment, and, as it were, embryo revelation of all the prophecy which was to follow, so ought there to be a system, and combination, and evenness of progress and end in this book, which was thus gradually to be opened, as the Church should stand in need of its consolation. Thus, concurring with my author in the germ of his system, I concur with him so far in its spirit likewise as to believe, that, as upon the eve of Messiah’s former coming there was the dispensation of a fore runner and a preparation; so, upon the eve of his latter coming there may be, nay, there will be, a dispensation of special preparation and perhaps, even of a forerunner; which, I think, is signified in that prophetic voice announced under the sixth vial, ‘Behold, I come,’ &c. —Finally, it is enough for the confirmation of these views to find that each of the three great oppressions of the Church, the Pagan, the Papal, and the Infidel, was attended with a corresponding opening and understanding of that part of this book which severally concerneth each, and of the corresponding scriptures, which breathe the promise of the like deliverances. And this, I assert, has been the case: during the first three centuries, the Apocalypse was known and cherished in the Church as the great assurance of the downfall of Paganism; during the sufferings of the Waldenses and the Protestants, it was cherished as the ground of belief, that the Pope and the papal empire was the beast: and now it is beginning to be known from the same, that the infidel antichrist, who is to take the other out of the way, is the great sign of, and shall himself be destroyed in, the coming of the Lord.” (Pp. 22-23)

Again, he said:

“But would it reconcile them, would it enable us to hold the millennium, and be tremblingly alive to the uncertainty of the Lord’s coming, if we were to forego our system and adopt yours? Most certainly it would. But have not you also times determined, before which the Saviour is not to come? Yes; but these times and seasons the Father hath reserved in his own power. But are they not written in the scripture? They are written in the scripture, but hidden under such veils, as to have been completely shut up, until the time the Father shall be pleased by his Spirit to take off the veil which covereth them. But have you not sought to interpret them? We have sought, as Daniel did, to search into these prophetic numbers, but no one had ascertained the exact accomplishment of the great leading one, until the mighty events which fell out upon its accomplishment informed us that it was come to an end. So that these numbers did in no way, in past times, produce upon us the same effect which the millennium doth upon you, to cast forward, till after a fixed interval, our Lord’s coming, which we should look for daily. And now that the period of 1260 years is accomplished, and the period of 1290 also, are you not still expecting certain events prior to his appearing? Yes ever since we discovered the 1260 years to be accomplished, we have been observing the series of events which are to run, before our Lord’s coming, and we do expect certain events, such as the destruction of the Antichristian powers, and the spiritual vocation of Israel. Do not these then act upon you as the millennium doth upon us, to hinder and prevent that constant expectancy by which you set so much store, and which appeareth to have been the condition of the primitive church? No. They act upon us exactly as the forerunners of a king, the out-riders of his state, act upon the city which he is visiting. We are living amongst the signs of our Lord’s coming, we have seen six, and we are waiting for the seventh and last; we are lifting up our heads and stretching out our necks with expectation, we are all activity to get the house in order for the master whose avant-couriers have come in, we are all upon the way-side looking out for the Judge whose six precursors have arrived, we are all furnished with lamps, lest the bridegroom come in the night, and lo, though we be weighed down with slumber our loins are girt, and when the sound is heard, He cometh! lo, we are ready. And thus it cometh to pass, from the Lord’s not having broken the seal of those mysterious numbers until the years of omen were arrived, and the signs began to be given, that we were kept all the while of the mystery expecting his coming, and we were brought out of that state at once into the state of seeing the signs of his coming.” (Pp. 35-36)

Irving also devoted the major part of pages 26 through 28 to advancing this same doctrine, and mentioned it again on page 124. Yet the very man that claimed he had studied this paper in detail was totally unaware that Irving was teaching Historicism in this discourse.

Many Dispensationalists have done everything in their power to disconnect John Darby from the Irvingites. A comment in Dr. Charles Ryrie's book "Dispensationalism" has caused some to recoil in horror.
Dr. Ryrie stated on page 170 of the 2007 edition that Darby became interested in prophecy while attending one of the Albury Conferences. Since the book "Coming of Messiah..." is now available online anyone can read Edward Irving's Preliminary Discourse, which he added to the beginning of the English translation in 1827.

The poster here is attempting to call me out as a liar by stating that I did not mention Irving's historicist writings in his Preliminary Discourse.
If that is the straw he is going to use to stuff his strawman, then have at it.

Many of Irving's ideas in this work are not necessarily unique, however many of these same ideas did show up later in Darby's work.

On page 9 Irving writes, " The restoration of the Jewish nation, to be again the Church of God".

On page 10 Irving reveals he has been teaching the doctrine.
"I have begun the preliminary discourse by giving an exposition of the doctrine which I have been teaching".

On page 11...
"the work which I now offer to the English churches."

On page 14...
"Oh that my brethren in Christ might have the same divine satisfaction and unwearied delight in reading, that I had in translating this wonderful work!"

On page 52 we find one of the keys of Dispensational Theology...
"those prophecies which have received a partial fulfillment, but still look forward to a perfect accomplishment"

On page 63...
Irving uses the word "dispensation" 13 times.
One might think this could have something to do with Dispensational Theology.

On page 124...
"that I deemed it my duty to make known the great results to the Christian churches,"

"the Albury conference"

Also we find Lacunza placing a 45 day gap between the gathering of the Saints and the Second Advent in his book.

Did Irving have historicist theology in this work? Yes.

Did he have the beginnings of Dispensational Theology in this work? Yes.

The historical record shows that former members of the Brethren and the Irvingites, clearly stated in writing that Darby's "Secret Rapture" doctrine came from the Irvingites.

Darby's greatest contribution seems to have been the division of scripture into that for the Church and that for the Jews.

Dispensationalists may continue attempts to disconnect Darby from the Irvingites. However, their greatest obstacle is the historical written record.


Origin of the Pretrib Rapture Doctrine
http://www.answersinrevelation.org/pretrib_history.pdf

PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) read pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418

Lacunza’s book “Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty“ is available at…
PDF Files

.

 

[Biblewriter]

Many Dispensationalists have done everything in their power to disconnect John Darby from the Irvingites. A comment in Dr. Charles Ryrie's book "Dispensationalism" has caused some to recoil in horror.
Dr. Ryrie stated on page 170 of the 2007 edition that Darby became interested in prophecy while attending one of the Albury Conferences. Since the book "Coming of Messiah..." is now available online anyone can read Edward Irving's Preliminary Discourse, which he added to the beginning of the English translation in 1827.

The poster here is attempting to call me out as a liar by stating that I did not mention Irving's historicist writings in his Preliminary Discourse.
If that is the straw he is going to use to stuff his strawman, then have at it.

Many of Irving's ideas in this work are not necessarily unique, however many of these same ideas did show up later in Darby's work.

On page 9 Irving writes, " The restoration of the Jewish nation, to be again the Church of God".

On page 10 Irving reveals he has been teaching the doctrine.
"I have begun the preliminary discourse by giving an exposition of the doctrine which I have been teaching".

On page 11...
"the work which I now offer to the English churches."

On page 14...
"Oh that my brethren in Christ might have the same divine satisfaction and unwearied delight in reading, that I had in translating this wonderful work!"

On page 52 we find one of the keys of Dispensational Theology...
"those prophecies which have received a partial fulfillment, but still look forward to a perfect accomplishment"

On page 63...
Irving uses the word "dispensation" 13 times.
One might think this could have something to do with Dispensational Theology.

On page 124...
"that I deemed it my duty to make known the great results to the Christian churches,"

"the Albury conference"

Also we find Lacunza placing a 45 day gap between the gathering of the Saints and the Second Advent in his book.

Did Irving have historicist theology in this work? Yes.

Did he have the beginnings of Dispensational Theology in this work? Yes.

The historical record shows that former members of the Brethren and the Irvingites, clearly stated in writing that Darby's "Secret Rapture" doctrine came from the Irvingites.

Darby's greatest contribution seems to have been the division of scripture into that for the Church and that for the Jews.

Dispensationalists may continue attempts to disconnect Darby from the Irvingites. However, their greatest obstacle is the historical written record.


Origin of the Pretrib Rapture Doctrine
http://www.answersinrevelation.org/pretrib_history.pdf

PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) read pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418

Lacunza’s book “Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty“ is available at…
PDF Files

.

The real strawman is the claim that Darby got these ideas from Irving. To bolster this false idea, these people have insisted that the fact that Darby was still believing in Historicism in 1829, two years after Irving published his "Preliminary Discourse." Since Darby had not yet completely rejected Historicism at that time, it was alleged that this was proof that he did not yet have dispensational ideas in 1829.

The utter duplicity of this claim is clearly demonstrated by the fact that The very document which BABerean2 is alleging was the source of Darby's dispensationalism, not only acquiesed in Hstoricism, as Darby was still doing two years later, it openly taught it and insisted upon it as truth.

So if the fact that Darby was still acquiescing to Historicism in 1829 proves that he did not yet have dispensational ideas at that time, how is it that Irving's insistence on Hstoricism, in the very document in which Darby is alleged to have got his dispensational ideas, is simply stuffing a strawman?

But this is only the first installment on a detailed and complete answer to the complete falsehood of the basic claim, that Darby got his dispensational ideas from Irving. For in future posts I intend to present the proof that the real source of these ideas, if anything other than the scriptures themselves, lay in other documents that were even older that the one by Edward Irving, including several that pre-dated even Manuel Lacunza, and which were explicitly mentioned by either Darby or by his associates.

 

[BABerean2]

The real strawman is the claim that Darby got these ideas from Irving. To bolster this false idea, these people have insisted that the fact that Darby was still believing in Historicism in 1829, two years after Irving published his "Preliminary Discourse." Since Darby had not yet completely rejected Historicism at that time, it was alleged that this was proof that he did not yet have dispensational ideas in 1829.

The utter duplicity of this claim is clearly demonstrated by the fact that The very document which BABerean2 is alleging was the source of Darby's dispensationalism, not only acquiesed in Hstoricism, as Darby was still doing two years later, it openly taught it and insisted upon it as truth.

So if the fact that Darby was still acquiescing to Historicism in 1829 proves that he did not yet have dispensational ideas at that time, how is it that Irving's insistence on Hstoricism, in the very document in which Darby is alleged to have got his dispensational ideas, is simply stuffing a strawman?

But this is only the first installment on a detailed and complete answer to the complete falsehood of the basic claim, that Darby got his dispensational ideas from Irving. For in future posts I intend to present the proof that the real source of these ideas, if anything other than the scriptures themselves, lay in other documents that were even older that the one by Edward Irving, including several that pre-dated even Manuel Lacunza, and which were explicitly mentioned by either Darby or by his associates.

You seem to be ignoring the fact that Margaret Macdonald's "Secret Rapture" did not appear in "The Morning Watch" until the September 1830 issue.

Therefore there was an ongoing development of the doctrine after Irving published the book in 1827.


Based on the statements of Benjamin Newton and others, Darby did not accept the "Secret Rapture" until quite sometime later. It may have occurred after Irving died in 1834.

You also have to remember that Dr. Tommy Ice claims Darby came up with the pretrib doctrine in 1827, while recovering from a riding accident.
It is this claim by Ice that is completely destroyed by Darby's 1829 paper, since he never alluded to such an idea in 1829. This was the main purpose of providing Darby's 1829 paper, since Ice is a more famous Darby apologist than are you.

We still find some historicist ideas in Darby's "Notes on the Book of Revelation" published in 1839.

There was most certainly a mixture of historicist and dispensational theology during the 1820s and 1830s.


Therefore, if you think you can get your straw by showing historicist ideas from Irving, go ahead.

It still will not destroy the writings of Benjamin Newton and others who link Darby to the Irvingite "Secret Rapture", but if this venture makes you feel better, go ahead and keep gathering straw.

When it is time to tie me to a pole, pile up the straw, and light the fire, let me know.

I want to make sure to be there for the event.





Lacunza’s book “Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty“ is available at…
PDF Files


Origin of the Pretrib Rapture Doctrine
http://www.answersinrevelation.org/pretrib_history.pdf

Grant Jeffrey’s revision of early Church Posttrib viewpoints
http://www.answersinrevelation.org/Jeffrey.pdf

PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) read pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418


Darby, J. N., Reflections (1829), Prophetic No. 1
Reflections upon the Prophetic Inquiry and the views advanced in it

Genesis of Dispensational Theology (on YouTube)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ee4RS5pDntQ

.

 

[Biblewriter]

Based on the statements of Benjamin Newton and others, Darby did not accept the "Secret Rapture" until quite sometime later. It may have occurred after Irving died in 1834.

You also have to remember that Dr. Tommy Ice claims Darby came up with the pretrib doctrine in 1827, while recovering from a riding accident.
It is this claim by Ice that is completely destroyed by Darby's 1829 paper, since he never alluded to such an idea in 1829. This was the main purpose of providing Darby's 1829 paper, since Ice is a more famous Darby apologist than are you.

If you could come up with even one quotation that was not written by one of the enemies of the nineteenth century Plymouth Brethren, you might have something of probative value. Once again, the only thing you have actually proved was that Irving published his comments on dispensationalism in general, and on the pre-tribulation rapture in particular, before Darby or any of his associates did. But having published these ideas before someone else did does not even begin to prove that these others got the ideas from them.

And my charge of dupliciousness continues to apply even to your post I am answering now. For in it, you continue to pretend that the fact that Darby had not yet totally abandoned Historicism as proof that he had no dispensational ideas. But the very document you claim was the source of Darby's dispensationalism not only contained Historicist ideas, it taught them at length, and insisted that they were correct. At first you claimed that you had studied this document thoroughly, and knew it was thoroughly dispensational. And now that you are confronted with the undeniable proof that it was thoroughly Historicist, you claim that this is immaterial. While at the same time you are claiming that it is significant that Darby still had historicist ideas after that time.

Thus, you are talking out of both sides of your mouth. You claim that Darby's Historicism was significant, while at the same time claiming that Irving's Histoticism was insignificant.

And Tommy Ice is most certainly more famous that I am. But he is not nearly as well informed on the nineteenth century Plymouth Brethren doctrine as myself. For I devoted literally years to the study of the the writings of the nineteenth century Plymouth brethren. His comments concerning the history of doctrine in general, and particularly concerning the doctrines of this group, contain numerous errors. And as you have pointed out, one of these errors is that Darby came up with the pre-tribulation rapture in 1827. (If he indeed said that, for I know of this statement only from you. I think it is more likely that he said Darby's interest in prophecy began in 1827, when he was studying instead of preaching because he was temporarily crippled due to a horse riding accident. For this is what Darby himself said.)

 

[Danoh]

So the ignorance being continually kept alive is the issue of what any of those men believed, came up with, vommitted, you name it - and not whether Dispensationlism itself is Scripturally sound.

And that, by the only means that actually counts - the Scripture.

And this argument is on the table to begin with due to those who get their supposed understanding of Scripture from the writings of men, thus, their notion that those books that do not agree with their own books based reasoning are not only wrong, but that all this about one writer or another said, thought up or what have you, in contrast to the opposing side's version of that mess - is the issue.

You and yours go at it. Enjoy yourselves, in fact.

Think I'll stick to studying out in Scripture how to study things out in Scripture.

Things like how to study out ITS' intended sense as to words like "adoption," "olive tree," "dispensation," "and so," and so on.

 

[BABerean2]

If you could come up with even one quotation that was not written by one of the enemies of the nineteenth century Plymouth Brethren, you might have something of probative value.

And Tommy Ice is most certainly more famous that I am. But he is not nearly as well informed on the nineteenth century Plymouth Brethren doctrine as myself. For I devoted literally years to the study of the the writings of the nineteenth century Plymouth brethren. His comments concerning the history of doctrine in general, and particularly concerning the doctrines of this group, contain numerous errors. And as you have pointed out, one of these errors is that Darby came up with the pre-tribulation rapture in 1827. "(If he indeed said that, for I know of this statement only from you. I think it is more likely that he said Darby's interest in prophecy began in 1827, when he was studying instead of preaching because he was temporarily crippled due to a horse riding accident. For this is what Darby himself said.)

Please check Dr. Ice's comments for yourself.

I could be lying in an attempt to slant the true history of modern Dispensational Theology.

Although Ice rambles quite a bit, his pretrib comments start around 36 minutes into the video and continue for the next 5 or 6 minutes.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UVLND5VL82M


Maybe if you watch this at least you and Ice will be on the same page, if that is possible.




.

 

[Biblewriter]

To go back a post or two:

On page 9 Irving writes, " The restoration of the Jewish nation, to be again the Church of God"...

On page 52 we find one of the keys of Dispensational Theology...
"those prophecies which have received a partial fulfillment, but still look forward to a perfect accomplishment"...


On page 63...
Irving uses the word "dispensation" 13 times.
One might think this could have something to do with Dispensational Theology.

Darby himself simply traced these ideas to the Bible. But if you had really been trying to learn where Darby got his ideas, instead of just wanting to prove what you have already assumed was true, that he got them from Irving, you would have noticed this key statement in Darby's first paper on prophecy:

"Another subject is the restoration of the Jews to their own land. The calm and judicious Lowth, in a day when nothing but the force of Scripture influenced him, could not withhold assent from the directness of the testimonies to this." (pp. 39-40 in the link you provided to this paper.)

Darby called this man "calm and judicious" because he was accusing all the current writers on prophecy of being the very opposite. For earlier in this same paper he had said:

"I confess I think the modern writers on prophecy justly chargeable with following their own thoughts hastily, and far too much removed from the control of Scripture. They have got some general view, perhaps sound, of God's purpose. They take some text or prophecy as a starting point, pursue the suggestions of their own minds in connection with their general views previously adopted, but leave the results almost entirely untried by the direct testimony of the word, affording us theories, often enlarging when by a writer much imbued with Scripture, often of general soundness of view though replete with false statements: but, when not by such a writer, diverging into absurdities calculated to awaken the impatience of many and bring the truth of all into dishonour. In the meanwhile the Church is distracted. There is not a single writer whose writings I have seen (unless it be the author of one short inquiry) who is not chargeable with this fault. Some of the most confident really call for much reprobation." (pp. 6-7 of the same paper)

I will have more to say about Darby's "one short inquiry" later. But for now, I will just ask why you did not even bother to ask yourself "Who is this 'calm and Judicious Lowth,' of whom Darby seems to have such a high opinion.?" Your first hint as to his identity would have come in Darby's words that he wrote "in a day when nothing but the force of Scripture influenced him."

This turns out to be William Lowth, a highly regarded Episcopal clergyman who was born in 1661, only 50 years after the King James translation of the Bible was published. He began writing in the 1600s, and in the early 1700s published a whole series of commentaries on the various Old Testament books of prophecy during the years 1714 to 1725. (As a side note, Manuel Lacunza was only a little child when this series of commentaries was completed.)

One of these, his commentary on Ezekiel, is available here:
Commentary Upon The Prophet Ezekiel By William Lowth: Free PDF

And William Lowth very clearly taught both of these ideas that you claim Darby got from Irving.

As to the restoration of the Jews, he taught is in too many places to even list. But a few examples are:

Concerning Ezekiel 16:55 he said:

“When Samaria and her Daughters shall return to their former Estate, then thou and thy daughters shall return to your former Estate.] When the Prophets foretel the General Conversion and Restoration of the Jewish Nation, they always join Judah and Israel together, as equal Sharers in that Blessing. See Chap, xxxvii. 16—22. and the Notes there. (p. 118)

Concerning Ezekiel 16:61 he said:

"Then shalt thou remember thy Ways, and be ashamed.] The Jews shall be touched with a deep Sense and Remorse for their former Provocations, as necessary Preparation for their Conversion: Compare Chap. xx. 43. xxxvi. 31. Jerem. xxxi. 9. 1. 5. and see the Notes upon those Places. (p. 120)

And concerning Ezekiel 20:34 he said:

“And I will bring you out from the People, and gather you out of the Countries wherein ye are scattered, with a mighty Hand, &c.] This some understand of God's bringing his People out of the Countries of the Moabites, Ammonites, and other Neighbouring Nations, whither many of them were carried Captive, or went as voluntary Exiles before the general Captivity by the Chaldeans: See Jerem. xii. 14. xl. 11. But I conceive it is rather to be understood of the general Restoration of the Jewish Nation from the several Parts of the World where they are dispersed: an Event often spoken of in the Prophets: See Ver. 38, 41. and compare this and the following Verses with several Passages in the xxxiv, xxxvi, and xxxvii Chapters of this Prophecy.” (pp 150-151)

And Lowth not only taught this idea clearly but referenced others who had likewise taught it.

Concerning Ezekiel 20:38 he said:

“Ibid. I will bring them forth out of the Country where they Sojourn, and they shall not enter into the Land of Israel.] See the Note on Ver. 35. The Word Country in the Singular Number may be equivalent to Countries in the Plural Ver. 41. The Sentence alludes as the former does, to the Judgment denounced upon the rebellious Israelites, that their Carcasses should fall in the Wilderness, and themselves never enter into the Land of Canaan: which shall be only a Portion for the Righteous among them. This Text among many others favours the Opinion maintained by several Authors both Ancient and Modern, that the Jews upon their Conversion shall return into their own Land. Comp. Chap. xi. 14. xxviii. 25. (See the Note there) xxxiv. 13. xxxvi. 24.” (p. 153)

And concerning Ezekiel 20:40 he said:

“For in my holy Mountain, in the Mountain of the height of Israel.] In the Christian Church, called God's holy Mountain in allusion to the Temple at Jerusalem, built upon Mount Moriah: See the Notes upon Chap. xvii. 23. and Isa. ii. 2. The Prophet speaks here of the Jews as converted and united to the Christian Church: tho’ some Learned Men are willing to believe that upon their Conversion and Return to their own Countrey, certain Privileges shall belong to the Earthly Jerusalem, as the Metropolis of that Nation. See Isa. lxv. 18, 19. lxvi. 20. Jerem. iii. 17. Joel. iii. 1 7, &c. (p. 154)

And as to teaching both a previous partial fulfillment of prophecy a future complete one, he said concerning Ezekiel 11:17:

"I will even gather them from the People.] This may be in some degree fulfilled in those that returned from Captivity, but the utmost Completion of this and the following Verses, must be expected at the general Restoration of the Jewish Nation. See the following Notes, and Compare Chap. xx. 4. xxviii. 25. xxxiv. 13. xxxvi. 24.(p. 78)

And he said concerning Ezekiel 34:23:

“Ibid. He shall feed them, and he shall be their Shepherd.] This Prophesy was remarkably fulfilled, when Christ by the Preaching of the Gospel gathered in one the Children of God which were scattered abroad, Joh. xi. 52. Eph. i. 10. among whom were many of the Loft sheep of the House of Israel, Matt. x. 6. But it will receive a farther Completion at the general Conversion of the Jews, when the Time will come that they shall say, Blessed is he that cometh inthe Name of the Lord, Matth. xxiii. 37. And this signal Event will usher in or complete the Fulness of the Gentiles, See Rom. xi. 12, 15, 2 5 32.”

Again, concerning Ezekiel 36 he wrote:

“Ver. 8. Yield your fruit to my People of lsrael, for they are at Hand to come.] This may have an imediate Aspect upon the Jews Return from Babylon, when they were restored to the Possession of their own Country. If we suppose the Words to relate to the General Restoration of the Nation, the longest Distance of time that the Things of this World can extend to, is but as a Moment in respect of Eternity. Compare Heb.x. 37. Philip. iv. 5.
“Ver. 10. And the Wastes shall be builded.] Compare Ver. 33. This may likewise have been in some Measure fulfilled at their Return from Babylon. Compare Isa. lviii. ix. Ixi. 4.
“Ver. 11. And I will multiply upon you Man and Beast.] As God in his Judgments threatens to cut off Man and Beaft from a Land; See Chap. xiv. 17. So here he promises to replenish it with both. Compare Jerem. xxxi. 27. xxxiii. 12.
“Ibid. And will do better unto you than at your Beginnings.] In bestowing upon you the Blessings of the Gospel: the Promises of which were made first to the Jews and to their Children: Act.ii. 39. The Words may likewise imply that God would give them a more lasting and secure Possession of their Land than ever they had before. See the following Verses. (p. 292)

And as to mentioning dispensations, he said concerning Ezekiel 20:11:

“Which if a Man do, he shall even live in them.] By Life is meant in the Old Testament all that Happiness which is contained in the Literal Sense of the Promises belonging to that Covenant: Comp. Ver. 25. and Deut. xxx. 15, &c. Psal. lxix. 32. Amos v. 4. Under these were Mystically comprehended the Promises of a Better Life, wherein God will bestow upon his Servants the peculiar Marks of his Favour. See Psal. xvi. 11. These Promises were made over to the Jews upon Condition of their punctual Obedience to the whole Law: Levit.xviiu 5. xxvi. 3, &c. Deut. xxvii.26. And several Persons under that Dispensation are styled Blameless by reason of the Sincerity of their Obedience, tho' it was not Perfect or Unsinning : See Luke i.6. Philip. iii. 6. (pp. 143-144)

So all of these ideas, which you imagine Darby got from the Edward Irving he despised, were taught a hundred years earlier by William Lowth, whom Darby praised in the very paper you are presenting as evidence.

 

[Biblewriter]

So the ignorance being continually kept alive is the issue of what any of those men believed, came up with, vommitted, you name it - and not whether Dispensationlism itself is Scripturally sound.

And that, by the only means that actually counts - the Scripture.

And this argument is on the table to begin with due to those who get their supposed understanding of Scripture from the writings of men, thus, their notion that those books that do not agree with their own books based reasoning are not only wrong, but that all this about one writer or another said, thought up or what have you, in contrast to the opposing side's version of that mess - is the issue.

You and yours go at it. Enjoy yourselves, in fact.

Think I'll stick to studying out in Scripture how to study things out in Scripture.

Things like how to study out ITS' intended sense as to words like "adoption," "olive tree," "dispensation," "and so," and so on.

Danoh, I completely agree with you that this entire line of reasoning is completely foolish.That the only thing that counts is whether or not it agrees with scripture.

But I am addressing the fact that it is a blatant lie that these ideas came from the discredited Edward Irving, or from his demonically inspired group.

 

[Danoh]

Danoh, I completely agree with you that this entire line of reasoning is completely foolish.That the only thing that counts is whether or not it agrees with scripture.

But I am addressing the fact that it is a blatant lie that these ideas came from the discredited Edward Irving, or from his demonically inspired group.

I appreciate your effort, dear brother.

I do enjoy reading your posting your findings as your comments often align with their own assertions.

Ironic that one of the above by Darby describes BAB2's own ways.

You and your wife are in my prayers, by the way. Here's to the power of yours and her testimony before others during her ilness. My heart goes out to you..

 

[Biblewriter]

An interesting historical account can be found at:
Short Papers on Church History - Chapter 56

Toward the end of the first third of this document, in which page numbers are not noted, we find the words:

"The study of prophetic truth was greatly revived in the early part of this century. In the year 1821 a short treatise, entitled "The Latter Rain," by the Rev. Lewis Way, made its appearance. The main object of the writer is to prove from scripture the restoration of Israel, and the consequent glory in the land. His poem entitled, "Palingenesia," or "The World to Come," appeared in 1824. Thoughts on the "Scriptural Expectations of the Church," by Basilicus, followed it in 1826. The author takes a wider range in this book than in the former, though the kingdom of Israel occupies a prominent place. In 1827 the Rev. Edward Irving endeavoured to arouse the professing church, but especially his brethren in the ministry, to a sense of their responsibility as to the truth of prophecy. He translated the work of Ben Ezra, a converted Jew, on "The Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty," with a long preliminary discourse. This book was originally written in Spanish, and first published in Spain in the year 1812. The circulation of these books, with some others that appeared about this time, and fresh articles constantly appearing in the magazines, awakened a deep interest in the prophetic scriptures, which became at that time an entirely new study, and led to the establishment of what were called "The Prophetic Meetings," in Great Britain and Ireland -they were held chiefly at Albury Park in England, and at Powerscourt in Ireland. Clergymen and private gentlemen attended those meetings for some time; but, in their reading, it does not appear that they saw much beyond the restoration of Israel, and the glory of the millennial kingdom. The relations of Christ to the church, as distinct from the destiny of Israel and the earth, were not then clearly seen." ("Short Papers on Church History," by Andrew Miller, the last chapter as originally published.)

The last of the pre-Irving articles mentioned in this article, written in 1826 under the Pseudonym Basilicus, was actually written by Lewis Way. It should be noted in passing that Irving mentioned this article in his "Preliminary discourse," saying:

"So that it appeared that the great work among the divines on the continent, written by one Lacunza a Jesuit, was the same work which was laid upon my table without any information concerning it, except that it was written by Juan Josafat Ben-Ezra; but of which God had given me the discernment to perceive that it was the master work of one of his most gifted servants. Now let this book be read as a voice from the Roman Catholic Church, and let the Palingenesia and Basilicus’ Letters of my friend be read as a voice from the Church of England, and let the substance of my discourses for the last year, as given above, be read as a voice from the Kirk of Scotland; and when the coincidence of sentiment and doctrine is perceived in the diversity of personal character and particular interpretations, let any one if he dare, reject the whole matter as the ravings and dreamings of fanciful men." (p. 14 in the PDF file linked to by BEABerean2)

I am convinced that this article is also the single exception Darby made to his general condemnation of all the prophetic writers of his day. It it true that I cannot prove this. But this article indeed does not have any of the charistics he complained of in all the other articles.

In his article, whose full title was "Thoughts on the Scriptural Expectations of the Christian Church," Way presented a full fledged dispensationalism. It was mentioned by name by one of his associates in later years, And i suspect that the reason Darby did not mention it by name was because its true author was not known at the time.

The 1828 version of this article can be read in its entirety at http://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=hvd.hwt7x4;view=1up;seq=5

This article was dispensational in its entire organization, and taught a full fledged dispensationaliam from start to finish.The most significant evidence of this is perhaps the following short summary of his system:

"It will be readily admitted that a new aera commenced at the first appearance of Christ, and the promulgation of the Gospel, throughout the Roman Empire, the scriptural designation of which is "the fulness of time." This expression refers distinctly to the mission and personal office of our Lord himself: and the period which-thus commenced appears to be continued, without any marked interruption, to his second coming; the whole aera being spoken of in this way by himself, and characterized by his Apostles under the general title of the last days," in distinction from sundry other times, as the Paradisaical, Patriarchal, or Mosaic dispensationa. But another aera seems to be expressly noticed, and it is specifically entitled "The dispensation (or Economy) of the fulness of times:" under which, scattered parts will be gathered together; disjoined parts united in one great recapitulation of the whole mystery of God: when the detached and manifold gradations of the system hitherto in action will appear to have been working together towards one determinate issue, – the final scheme of man’s redemption in body and soul, as originally conceived and planned in the eternal counsels of Jehovah: when the whole creation, so long groaning and travailing in pain together under the corruption introduced by the Fall, shall be delivered by the power, and subjected to the dominion, of the Son of Man, the second Adam: when the earth, once cursed for the sake of man, shall be blessed again, renewed, and fitter for the habitation of the righteous: when the typical theocracy of the people shall be realized in the kingdom of Israel restored to the risen saints of the Most High: when "the Lord shall reign in Mount Zion, and before his ancients gloriously," during the time appointed of the Father." (pp. 30-31 in the link provided)

So this article, which was most certainly available to Darby and which he seemed to have referred to, and which Darby's associate referred to, and which Irving explicitly referred to, unquestionably taught a full fledged dispensationalism before Irving wrote his "Preliminary Discourse," In which Irving unquestionably taught some dispensational ideas, while resolutely insisting of a full fledged Historicism.

Thus it has been conclusively proved that all the dispensational ideas Darby allegedly got from Irving, he actually got from a man who wrote a hundred years earlier, if he got them from any man at all, rather than simply from the scriptures, and a full fledged dispensationalism was taught in England previous to Irving, by a man that Darby probably knew about and in a paper he probably read.

 

[BABerean2]

To go back a post or two:


Darby himself simply traced these ideas to the Bible. But if you had really been trying to learn where Darby got his ideas, instead of just wanting to prove what you have already assumed was true, that he got them from Irving, you would have noticed this key statement in Darby's first paper on prophecy:

"Another subject is the restoration of the Jews to their own land. The calm and judicious Lowth, in a day when nothing but the force of Scripture influenced him, could not withhold assent from the directness of the testimonies to this." (pp. 39-40 in the link you provided to this paper.)

Darby called this man "calm and judicious" because he was accusing all the current writers on prophecy of being the very opposite. For earlier in this same paper he had said:

"I confess I think the modern writers on prophecy justly chargeable with following their own thoughts hastily, and far too much removed from the control of Scripture. They have got some general view, perhaps sound, of God's purpose. They take some text or prophecy as a starting point, pursue the suggestions of their own minds in connection with their general views previously adopted, but leave the results almost entirely untried by the direct testimony of the word, affording us theories, often enlarging when by a writer much imbued with Scripture, often of general soundness of view though replete with false statements: but, when not by such a writer, diverging into absurdities calculated to awaken the impatience of many and bring the truth of all into dishonour. In the meanwhile the Church is distracted. There is not a single writer whose writings I have seen (unless it be the author of one short inquiry) who is not chargeable with this fault. Some of the most confident really call for much reprobation." (pp. 6-7 of the same paper)

I will have more to say about Darby's "one short inquiry" later. But for now, I will just ask why you did not even bother to ask yourself "Who is this 'calm and Judicious Lowth,' of whom Darby seems to have such a high opinion.?" Your first hint as to his identity would have come in Darby's words that he wrote "in a day when nothing but the force of Scripture influenced him."

This turns out to be William Lowth, a highly regarded Episcopal clergyman who was born in 1661, only 50 years after the King James translation of the Bible was published. He began writing in the 1600s, and in the early 1700s published a whole series of commentaries on the various Old Testament books of prophecy during the years 1714 to 1725. (As a side note, Manuel Lacunza was only a little child when this series of commentaries was completed.)

One of these, his commentary on Ezekiel, is available here:
Commentary Upon The Prophet Ezekiel By William Lowth: Free PDF

And William Lowth very clearly taught both of these ideas that you claim Darby got from Irving.

As to the restoration of the Jews, he taught is in too many places to even list. But a few examples are:

Concerning Ezekiel 16:55 he said:

“When Samaria and her Daughters shall return to their former Estate, then thou and thy daughters shall return to your former Estate.] When the Prophets foretel the General Conversion and Restoration of the Jewish Nation, they always join Judah and Israel together, as equal Sharers in that Blessing. See Chap, xxxvii. 16—22. and the Notes there. (p. 118)

Concerning Ezekiel 16:61 he said:

"Then shalt thou remember thy Ways, and be ashamed.] The Jews shall be touched with a deep Sense and Remorse for their former Provocations, as necessary Preparation for their Conversion: Compare Chap. xx. 43. xxxvi. 31. Jerem. xxxi. 9. 1. 5. and see the Notes upon those Places. (p. 120)

And concerning Ezekiel 20:34 he said:

“And I will bring you out from the People, and gather you out of the Countries wherein ye are scattered, with a mighty Hand, &c.] This some understand of God's bringing his People out of the Countries of the Moabites, Ammonites, and other Neighbouring Nations, whither many of them were carried Captive, or went as voluntary Exiles before the general Captivity by the Chaldeans: See Jerem. xii. 14. xl. 11. But I conceive it is rather to be understood of the general Restoration of the Jewish Nation from the several Parts of the World where they are dispersed: an Event often spoken of in the Prophets: See Ver. 38, 41. and compare this and the following Verses with several Passages in the xxxiv, xxxvi, and xxxvii Chapters of this Prophecy.” (pp 150-151)

And Lowth not only taught this idea clearly but referenced others who had likewise taught it.

Concerning Ezekiel 20:38 he said:

“Ibid. I will bring them forth out of the Country where they Sojourn, and they shall not enter into the Land of Israel.] See the Note on Ver. 35. The Word Country in the Singular Number may be equivalent to Countries in the Plural Ver. 41. The Sentence alludes as the former does, to the Judgment denounced upon the rebellious Israelites, that their Carcasses should fall in the Wilderness, and themselves never enter into the Land of Canaan: which shall be only a Portion for the Righteous among them. This Text among many others favours the Opinion maintained by several Authors both Ancient and Modern, that the Jews upon their Conversion shall return into their own Land. Comp. Chap. xi. 14. xxviii. 25. (See the Note there) xxxiv. 13. xxxvi. 24.” (p. 153)

And concerning Ezekiel 20:40 he said:

“For in my holy Mountain, in the Mountain of the height of Israel.] In the Christian Church, called God's holy Mountain in allusion to the Temple at Jerusalem, built upon Mount Moriah: See the Notes upon Chap. xvii. 23. and Isa. ii. 2. The Prophet speaks here of the Jews as converted and united to the Christian Church: tho’ some Learned Men are willing to believe that upon their Conversion and Return to their own Countrey, certain Privileges shall belong to the Earthly Jerusalem, as the Metropolis of that Nation. See Isa. lxv. 18, 19. lxvi. 20. Jerem. iii. 17. Joel. iii. 1 7, &c. (p. 154)

And as to teaching both a previous partial fulfillment of prophecy a future complete one, he said concerning Ezekiel 11:17:

"I will even gather them from the People.] This may be in some degree fulfilled in those that returned from Captivity, but the utmost Completion of this and the following Verses, must be expected at the general Restoration of the Jewish Nation. See the following Notes, and Compare Chap. xx. 4. xxviii. 25. xxxiv. 13. xxxvi. 24.(p. 78)

And he said concerning Ezekiel 34:23:

“Ibid. He shall feed them, and he shall be their Shepherd.] This Prophesy was remarkably fulfilled, when Christ by the Preaching of the Gospel gathered in one the Children of God which were scattered abroad, Joh. xi. 52. Eph. i. 10. among whom were many of the Loft sheep of the House of Israel, Matt. x. 6. But it will receive a farther Completion at the general Conversion of the Jews, when the Time will come that they shall say, Blessed is he that cometh inthe Name of the Lord, Matth. xxiii. 37. And this signal Event will usher in or complete the Fulness of the Gentiles, See Rom. xi. 12, 15, 2 5 32.”

Again, concerning Ezekiel 36 he wrote:

“Ver. 8. Yield your fruit to my People of lsrael, for they are at Hand to come.] This may have an imediate Aspect upon the Jews Return from Babylon, when they were restored to the Possession of their own Country. If we suppose the Words to relate to the General Restoration of the Nation, the longest Distance of time that the Things of this World can extend to, is but as a Moment in respect of Eternity. Compare Heb.x. 37. Philip. iv. 5.
“Ver. 10. And the Wastes shall be builded.] Compare Ver. 33. This may likewise have been in some Measure fulfilled at their Return from Babylon. Compare Isa. lviii. ix. Ixi. 4.
“Ver. 11. And I will multiply upon you Man and Beast.] As God in his Judgments threatens to cut off Man and Beaft from a Land; See Chap. xiv. 17. So here he promises to replenish it with both. Compare Jerem. xxxi. 27. xxxiii. 12.
“Ibid. And will do better unto you than at your Beginnings.] In bestowing upon you the Blessings of the Gospel: the Promises of which were made first to the Jews and to their Children: Act.ii. 39. The Words may likewise imply that God would give them a more lasting and secure Possession of their Land than ever they had before. See the following Verses. (p. 292)

And as to mentioning dispensations, he said concerning Ezekiel 20:11:

“Which if a Man do, he shall even live in them.] By Life is meant in the Old Testament all that Happiness which is contained in the Literal Sense of the Promises belonging to that Covenant: Comp. Ver. 25. and Deut. xxx. 15, &c. Psal. lxix. 32. Amos v. 4. Under these were Mystically comprehended the Promises of a Better Life, wherein God will bestow upon his Servants the peculiar Marks of his Favour. See Psal. xvi. 11. These Promises were made over to the Jews upon Condition of their punctual Obedience to the whole Law: Levit.xviiu 5. xxvi. 3, &c. Deut. xxvii.26. And several Persons under that Dispensation are styled Blameless by reason of the Sincerity of their Obedience, tho' it was not Perfect or Unsinning : See Luke i.6. Philip. iii. 6. (pp. 143-144)

So all of these ideas, which you imagine Darby got from the Edward Irving he despised, were taught a hundred years earlier by William Lowth, whom Darby praised in the very paper you are presenting as evidence.

Are you saying all of these comments from Lowth are about something besides the restoration of the Jewish nation to it's homeland after the Babylonian captivity?

Some of them are a reference to an endtime restoration based on the Gospel of the New Testament.
However, showing these comments from Lowth does not disconnect your hero Darby from the Irvingites.




Or... are you seeing what you want to see to defend your doctrine?

... And are you saying that Lowth using the word "dispensation" a couple of times outweighs Irving using the word 13 times on one page?

... And this is the hardcore evidence that you are using to prove that I am a liar!!!

I am starting to understand how Dave MacPherson felt when Dispensationalists started attacking him for revealing the connection between Darby and the Irvingites.

If you don't like the message, try to destroy the credibility of the messenger.


This attempt is about as valid as the "Darby on Trial", YouTube videos by Pastor Bryan Ross, which were posted on the forum by Danoh.

You guys are really something else!




Origin of the Pretrib Rapture Doctrine
http://www.answersinrevelation.org/pretrib_history.pdf

Grant Jeffrey’s revision of early Church Posttrib viewpoints
http://www.answersinrevelation.org/Jeffrey.pdf

PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) read pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418

Darby, J. N., Reflections (1829), Prophetic No. 1
Reflections upon the Prophetic Inquiry and the views advanced in it

Lacunza’s book “Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty“ is available at…
PDF Files


.

 

[Biblewriter]

Are you saying all of these comments from Lowth are about something besides the restoration of the Jewish nation to it's homeland after the Babylonian captivity?

Some of them are a reference to an endtime restoration based on the Gospel of the New Testament.
However, showing these comments from Lowth does not disconnect your hero Darby from the Irvingites.




Or... are you seeing what you want to see to defend your doctrine?

... And are you saying that Lowth using the word "dispensation" a couple of times outweighs Irving using the word 13 times on one page?

... And this is the hardcore evidence that you are using to prove that I am a liar!!!

I am starting to understand how Dave MacPherson felt when Dispensationalists started attacking him for revealing the connection between Darby and the Irvingites.

If you don't like the message, try to destroy the credibility of the messenger.


This attempt is about as valid as the "Darby on Trial", YouTube videos by Pastor Bryan Ross, which were posted on the forum by Danoh.

You guys are really something else!




Origin of the Pretrib Rapture Doctrine
http://www.answersinrevelation.org/pretrib_history.pdf

Grant Jeffrey’s revision of early Church Posttrib viewpoints
http://www.answersinrevelation.org/Jeffrey.pdf

PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) read pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418

Darby, J. N., Reflections (1829), Prophetic No. 1
Reflections upon the Prophetic Inquiry and the views advanced in it

Lacunza’s book “Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty“ is available at…
PDF Files


.

I did not quote it, because that particular detail was not as strong in the presentation of his teaching as others, but what he said about that particular detail was concerning Ezekiel 20:34:

“And I will bring you out from the People, and gather you out of the Countries wherein ye are scattered, with a mighty Hand, &c.] This some understand of God's bringing his People out of the Countries of the Moabites, Ammonites, and other Neighbouring Nations, whither many of them were carried Captive, or went as voluntary Exiles before the general Captivity by the Chaldeans: See Jerem. xii. 14. xl. 11. But I conceive it is rather to be understood of the general Restoration of the Jewish Nation from the several Parts of the World where they are dispersed: an Event often spoken of in the Prophets: See Ver. 38, 41. and compare this and the following Verses with several Passages in the xxxiv, xxxvi, and xxxvii Chapters of this Prophecy.” (pp. 150-151)

See also his comments concerning Ezekiel 38:8:

"“Ver. 8. After many Days thou fhalt be visited, &c.] This Judgment shall be inflicted by God upon thee, (Compare Isa. xxix. 6.) after a Succersion of many Generations: in the latter Years, or Days, as it follows here and Ver. 16. i. e. toward the end of the World, Compare Dan. viii. 26. Particularly the Expression of Latter Days, or Years is used to denote the Times of the General Restoration of the Jewish Nation. See Deut. iv. 30. Jerem.xxx. 24. Hos. iii. 5.
“Ibid. Thou shalt come into the Land that is brought back from the Sword.] The Land is
put for the People of the Land, who are said to be brought back from the Sword, as they are elsewhere styled a Remnant, i. e. those that should survive after the Hardships they had suffered in their several Dispersions, and the Judgments that should fall upon the Disobedient in their Return Home: See the Notes upon Chap. xx. 54—38. and upon Isa. iv. 2. And perhaps those Words of Jeremiah, Chap. xxxi. 2. may be best explained to this Sense, The People that were left of the Sword, found Grace in the Wilderness. The whole Chapter relates to the General Conversion and Restoration of the Jews, and the Prophet speaks in that Verse of the Favours God would shew to those that should escape the severe Judgments that should destroy the Disobedient in their Passage home to their own Country, called the Desert or Wilderness by Isaiah, Chap. xl. J. and by Ezekiel the Wilderness of the People, or Nations, Chap. xx. 35. See the Notes upon that Place.
“Ibid. And gathered out of many People.] See the Note upon Chap, xxxiv. 15.
“Ibid. Against the Mountains of Israel.] See Chap, xxxvi. 1, 4.] which have been always waste.] Or rather, altogether waste, as the LXX rightly translate it.
“Ibid. But it is brought forth out of the Nations, and they shall dwell safely all of them.] Or,
And they have dwelt safely all of them; the future Tense being often put for the Preter perfect. The Sense is, that after the Return of the People of Israel into their own Country, and their having lived there for some time in Peace and Safety, this Enemy will think to take Advantage of their Security, and fall upon them unexpectedly. Compare Ver. 11." (pp. 312-313)

Your arguments are totally desperate, Read it for yourself. It has been conclusively proved, and you are grasping at straws.

 

[BABerean2]

I did not quote it, because that particular detail was not as strong in the presentation of his teaching as others, but what he said about that particular detail was concerning Ezekiel 20:34:

“And I will bring you out from the People, and gather you out of the Countries wherein ye are scattered, with a mighty Hand, &c.] This some understand of God's bringing his People out of the Countries of the Moabites, Ammonites, and other Neighbouring Nations, whither many of them were carried Captive, or went as voluntary Exiles before the general Captivity by the Chaldeans: See Jerem. xii. 14. xl. 11. But I conceive it is rather to be understood of the general Restoration of the Jewish Nation from the several Parts of the World where they are dispersed: an Event often spoken of in the Prophets: See Ver. 38, 41. and compare this and the following Verses with several Passages in the xxxiv, xxxvi, and xxxvii Chapters of this Prophecy.” (pp. 150-151)

See also his comments concerning Ezekiel 38:8:

"“Ver. 8. After many Days thou fhalt be visited, &c.] This Judgment shall be inflicted by God upon thee, (Compare Isa. xxix. 6.) after a Succersion of many Generations: in the latter Years, or Days, as it follows here and Ver. 16. i. e. toward the end of the World, Compare Dan. viii. 26. Particularly the Expression of Latter Days, or Years is used to denote the Times of the General Restoration of the Jewish Nation. See Deut. iv. 30. Jerem.xxx. 24. Hos. iii. 5.
“Ibid. Thou shalt come into the Land that is brought back from the Sword.] The Land is
put for the People of the Land, who are said to be brought back from the Sword, as they are elsewhere styled a Remnant, i. e. those that should survive after the Hardships they had suffered in their several Dispersions, and the Judgments that should fall upon the Disobedient in their Return Home: See the Notes upon Chap. xx. 54—38. and upon Isa. iv. 2. And perhaps those Words of Jeremiah, Chap. xxxi. 2. may be best explained to this Sense, The People that were left of the Sword, found Grace in the Wilderness. The whole Chapter relates to the General Conversion and Restoration of the Jews, and the Prophet speaks in that Verse of the Favours God would shew to those that should escape the severe Judgments that should destroy the Disobedient in their Passage home to their own Country, called the Desert or Wilderness by Isaiah, Chap. xl. J. and by Ezekiel the Wilderness of the People, or Nations, Chap. xx. 35. See the Notes upon that Place.
“Ibid. And gathered out of many People.] See the Note upon Chap, xxxiv. 15.
“Ibid. Against the Mountains of Israel.] See Chap, xxxvi. 1, 4.] which have been always waste.] Or rather, altogether waste, as the LXX rightly translate it.
“Ibid. But it is brought forth out of the Nations, and they shall dwell safely all of them.] Or,
And they have dwelt safely all of them; the future Tense being often put for the Preter perfect. The Sense is, that after the Return of the People of Israel into their own Country, and their having lived there for some time in Peace and Safety, this Enemy will think to take Advantage of their Security, and fall upon them unexpectedly. Compare Ver. 11." (pp. 312-313)

Your arguments are totally desperate, Read it for yourself. It has been conclusively proved, and you are grasping at straws.

You have now solved the mystery and proved Dr. Ice wrong when he said Darby came up with Dispensational Theology and the Pretrib rapture while recovering from a riding accident in 1827.

You have also proved that Lowth believed the Jews would be returned to their own land in the later times.

And since Darby had read some of Lowth's work, this must mean he must have somehow gotten the "Secret Rapture" of the Irvingites and the Dispensational doctrine from Lowth's ideas.

This also means that Brethren leaders Benjamin Newton and Samuel Tregelles must have had an ax to grind against Darby and therefore made up the connection between Darby and the Irvingites.

Also, the former Irvingites must have had an ax to grind against Darby and therefore made up the accusations that Darby got the "Secret Rapture" from the Irvingites.

And somehow the Irvingites found out about Darby's discovery of the pretrib doctrine in 1827, but he had kept it a secret. Then they published it in the September 1830 edition of "The Morning Watch", making it look like they came up with the idea instead of Darby.

You have now solved the mystery.

Thanks for exposing my desperate attempts to slander Darby.

 

[Biblewriter]

You have now solved the mystery and proved Dr. Ice wrong when he said Darby came up with Dispensational Theology and the Pretrib rapture while recovering from a riding accident in 1827.

You have also proved that Lowth believed the Jews would be returned to their own land in the later times.

And since Darby had read some of Lowth's work, this must mean he must have somehow gotten the "Secret Rapture" of the Irvingites and the Dispensational doctrine from Lowth's ideas.

This also means that Brethren leaders Benjamin Newton and Samuel Tregelles must have had an ax to grind against Darby and therefore made up the connection between Darby and the Irvingites.

Also, the former Irvingites must have had an ax to grind against Darby and therefore made up the accusations that Darby got the "Secret Rapture" from the Irvingites.

And somehow the Irvingites found out about Darby's discovery of the pretrib doctrine in 1827, but he had kept it a secret. Then they published it in the September 1830 edition of "The Morning Watch", making it look like they came up with the idea instead of Darby.

You have now solved the mystery.

Thanks for exposing my desperate attempts to slander Darby.

This discussion has not even been about the pre-trib rapture. It has been about dispensationalism. And it has not been about Ice, but about the lies that were circulated by the anti-Darby crowd in the nineteenth century and so delightedly circulated by the anti-dispensational crowd in the twentieth century.

And yes, Ice was wrong about his history in this case, as he has also been wrong about the history of doctrine in numerous other cases. But that is neither here nor there.

What I have proved is that the same ideas that you imagine Darby got from Irving, whom Darby despised, were taught a hundred years earlier by Lowth, about whose books Darby respectfully commented in his very first article on prophecy.

In short, I have conclusively proved that you are leveling a false accusation against Darby.

Now, are you going to cease from circulating this false accusation, or are you going to continue to violate the rules of this forum by continually flaming Darby and dispensationalism with accusations you now know to be dishonest? Only you can decide that question.

 

[BABerean2]

This discussion has not even been about the pre-trib rapture. It has been about dispensationalism. And it has not been about Ice, but about the lies that were circulated by the anti-Darby crowd in the nineteenth century and so delightedly circulated by the anti-dispensational crowd in the twentieth century.

And yes, Ice was wrong about his history in this case, as he has also been wrong about the history of doctrine in numerous other cases. But that is neither here nor there.

What I have proved is that the same ideas that you imagine Darby got from Irving, whom Darby despised, were taught a hundred years earlier by Lowth, about whose books Darby respectfully commented in his very first article on prophecy.

In short, I have conclusively proved that you are leveling a false accusation against Darby.

Now, are you going to cease from circulating this false accusation, or are you going to continue to violate the rules of this forum by continually flaming Darby and dispensationalism with accusations you now know to be dishonest? Only you can decide that question.

The problem with all manmade doctrines, whether it is the one from Joseph Smith, Charles Russell, John Calvin, or John Darby, is that they all have one thing in common.
They are all made of the same rotten flesh that I am made of.

They all also have defenders that have placed their man on a pedestal and do everything in their power to keep their man elevated above all of the others.
They all claim that their man got it right when it comes to Bible interpretation.
William Kelly, R.A. Huebner, Dr. Tommy Ice and now you have done everything in your power to defend Darby.

The problem that all of you have is that the historical written record has now become available due to the advent of the world-wide-web. Older books once relegated to the shelves of libraries are now available to all. The book from Lowth is just one example.

We have Dr. Ice telling us that Darby came up with Dispensationalism and the pretrib doctrine in 1827 while recovering from a riding accident.

You say Ice is wrong. You say Darby got his Dispensational doctrine from the writings of Lowth, because he had read Lowth and even mentions his name in his paper.

................................................................................

I am on this forum because, like George Mueller I could not get my Bible to match up with John Darby's doctrine.

This set me on a course to find out why my church body was teaching a doctrine that said something different than the older commentary found in the 1599 Geneva Bible.

Even those teaching the doctrine in Sunday school, agreed that John Nelson Darby brought the newer doctrine to America around the time of the Civil War.

One of the books recommended in my Sunday school class was "Dispensationalism" by Dr. Charles Ryrie. He was the one who stated that Darby became interested in prophecy while attending one of the Albury Conferences.

Edward Irving's Preliminary Discourse which he published with Lacunza's book in 1827 proves that Irving was teaching doctrine from Lacunza's book at the Albury Conference.

These are facts which are now a part of the historical written record.

We also have the paper by F.R. Coad which contains sources stating that Darby got his "Secret Rapture" doctrine from the Irvingites and that this was one of the factors that lead to the split between Darby and Brethren leader Benjamin Newton.

The sad truth is that many Darby defenders do not want those sitting in the pews of our evangelical church bodies to know anything about the history of the doctrine of Dispensationalism.
This fact in and of itself is very revealing.



It is my intention to continue to provide access to the older historical written record on this forum. Those reading this forum can continue to read what you have written and what I have written, along with the older sources.

They will have to judge for themselves what the truth really is.




Origin of the Pretrib Rapture Doctrine
http://www.answersinrevelation.org/pretrib_history.pdf

Grant Jeffrey’s revision of early Church Posttrib viewpoints
http://www.answersinrevelation.org/Jeffrey.pdf

PROPHETIC DEVELOPMENTS
with particular reference to the early Brethren Movement.
F. Roy Coad (Brethren Historian) read pages 10-26
http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=418

Darby, J. N., Reflections (1829), Prophetic No. 1
Reflections upon the Prophetic Inquiry and the views advanced in it

Lacunza’s book “Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty“ is available at…
PDF Files

Who Confirmed The Covenant?
http://christianmediaresearch.com/node/1023


.

 

[Danoh]

BW, do yourself the favor BAB2 has just provided.

It is crystal clear from your above exchanges even just these past two days alone, that there is something odd with how the guy approaches attempting to get at the intended sense of another's words. That he ends up at what he is clearly reading into their words no matter how often this is pointed out.

Do yourself a favor. The above two pages of postings betwen you and him make this obvious.

Whenever he starts up again with this error of his anywhere on the forum, all you need do from here on out is post the link to these two pages with a brief comment as to what they prove.

Not the man's actual intent, for only he and God know what said actual intent is. Thus, there is no point in stooping to mind reading his actual intent aa he has consistently done against men no longer here to share, let alone defend, what their actually intended sense had been.

Let him be guilty of that alone. You're actually done with him - he has done that good a job in proving your case with you.

In fact, if its ok with you, that is how I will use this link.

That each reader come to their own conclusion about the guy's assertions.

Thank you.

Though I am sure you have more findings to add - you must be the bright side to his dark, lol

 

[Biblewriter]

BW, do yourself the favor BAB2 has just provided.

It is crystal clear from your above exchanges even just these past two days alone, that there is something odd with how the guy approaches attempting to get at the intended sense of another's words. That he ends up at what he is clearly reading into their words no matter how often this is pointed out.

Do yourself a favor. The above two pages of postings betwen you and him make this obvious.

Whenever he starts up again with this error of his anywhere on the forum, all you need do from here on out is post the link to these two pages with a brief comment as to what they prove.

Not the man's actual intent, for only he and God know what said actual intent is. Thus, there is no point in stooping to mind reading his actual intent aa he has consistently done against men no longer here to share, let alone defend, what their actually intended sense had been.

Let him be guilty of that alone. You're actually done with him - he has done that good a job in proving your case with you.

In fact, if its ok with you, that is how I will use this link.

That each reader come to their own conclusion about the guy's assertions.

Thank you.

Though I am sure you have more findings to add - you must be the bright side to his dark, lol

You are right, Danoh. My job here is done. But I intend to continue the research he set me upon, for this will be important for many others. In another forum, I am already being encouraged to make a book of what I am finding.

 

[Biblewriter]

You are right, Danoh. My job here is done. But I intend to continue the research he set me upon, for this will be important for many others. In another forum, I am already being encouraged to make a book of what I am finding.

The book I mentioned here has finally been published under the title of "Ancient Dispensational Truth." It contains a lengthy appendix which traces the actual historical record showing the true source of Darby's dispensational ideas, if they had any source other than the scriptures themselves. the author is myself, James C. Morris, and it is now avalable online from Dispensational Publishing House. This, by the way, is not a vanity publisher, and I paid them nothng to publish it.