• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

The Margaret MacDonald lie.

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟554,225.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
As it has come up again in this forum, I will post a paper I recently wrote on the subject of the vision supposedly seen in 1830 by Margaret MacDonald of Glasgow, Scotland.

A False Accusation

The doctrine of the pre-tribulation rapture has been widely disparaged with a false accusation concerning its origin. This doctrine was popularized by John nelson Darby in the 1800's. (This is the man who coined the term “the rapture” for Christ’s coming to take his own out of the world.) An opponent of Darby’s claimed that he got this idea from a vision allegedly seen in 1830 by a young Scottish woman named Margaret MacDonald. But if Darby had paid any attention to information coming from such a source he would have been violating his most basic principles. He insisted that “There can be no new truth, which would not be found in the word.” Also saying “The Scriptures are the only rule or standard of faith and practice.” (From “The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby” second ed., William Kelly, ed., London, G. Morrish, not dated. The first quotation is from Vol 1, pg 350. The second is from Vol 3, pg 98.) These are not just exceptional statements of this very prolific writer, but basic principles that he consistently applied.

An example of this is the following note he wrote to a woman about some dreams she and some of her friends had reported.

“Very dear sister, – I hear that some of the sisters have had dreams about the coming of Jesus. This has given me uneasiness, for although absent in body, I am with you in spirit, desiring and seeking the good of all of you, the dear redeemed ones of our precious Saviour. It is by the word of God, our rule and our light in these last days, that we must abide. I do not pretend to say that God may not give warning by a dream, for the word of God says that He can do so; but we must be much upon our guard. We have no need of a dream with respect to matters revealed by God... You will generally find that sisters are the ones who have seen these things, and I have not, moreover, noticed that it has brought them, or others, nearer to God... So I beg these sisters to weigh these things well, and not to allow themselves readily to put faith in these dreams, as if they came from God. Let them not allow themselves to be carried away by their imagination, lest they should fall into the snare of the enemy, and lest he should take advantage of this to shake the faith of some.” (From “The Letters of J. N. D.”, Vol. 1, pp. 93-94, second ed., William Kelly, ed., London, G Morrish, 1914)

This letter clearly shows that Darby denounced the idea that these dreams had come from God because we should rely only on the word. (by this he plainly meant the Bible) Notice also the scornful nature of his comment that “You will generally find that sisters are the ones who have seen these things.” Lest anyone imagine that this letter refers to Margaret MacDonald, please note that the subject was dreams, not a vision. The dreams, and those who had them, were plural, not singular. And the letter, which infers that Darby had only recently heard about the dreams, was dated March 5th, 1845, fifteen years after Margaret MacDonald’s alleged vision.

In addition to rejecting all supposed truth from extra-Biblical sources, Darby also rejected all teaching or preaching by women. He wrote that “I do not accept a woman’s going out to evangelize. I never saw a woman meddle in teaching and church matters, but she brought mischief upon herself and everyone else. If she sits down with a company before her to teach them, she has got out of her place altogether.” (From “The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby” second ed., Vol 26, pg 383, William Kelly, ed., London, G. Morrish, not dated.) Again, he wrote, “A woman cannot be a principle agent in the work. It is contrary to the ways of God. She may help, GREATLY help, but not be the principle agent.” (From “The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby” second ed., Vol 32, pg 341, William Kelly, ed., London, G. Morrish, not dated.)

It is remotely possible that reading about or hearing of Margaret MacDonald’s alleged vision of a pre-tribulation rapture started him thinking on the subject. But there is no evidence that he even knew about this particular alleged vision. Some years ago Dave MacPherson capitalized on this lack of evidence with a book titled “The Incredible Cover-up.” In this book MacPherson added to the falsehood of the original accusation by claiming that Darby had covered up his contact with Margaret MacDonald. He devoted the entire book to a newspaper-like exposé to prove Darby had in fact visited Margaret MacDonald’s church, which was called the Catholic Apostolic Church. This was completely false. Darby not only did not cover up his visits there, but he openly wrote about them. He called this group the “Irvingites” because their main teacher was a man named Edward Irving. In the following account he referred to himself as the “Irish Clergyman” because he had been called that in the article he was answering. Notice that this account specifically mentions “Two brothers (respectable shipbuilders at port Glasgow, of the name of M’D – ), and their sister” as chief speakers at the meetings he attended. So he not only wrote about his visit to Margaret MacDonald’s church, but specifically mentioned her as a speaker at these meetings.

“But I must here (without any reproach to Mr. N., as it is a matter of memory) recall some facts, and rectify some statements. At Pentecost the languages were universally understood by those who spoke them; the Irvingite tongues never by any one: a notable difference. And this is so true, that after first trying their hand of making Chinese of it. It was suggested among them that it might be the tongue of angels, as it was said, “If I speak with the tongues of men and angels” – delightful idea!
“Mr. N. is quite exact in his account of the report of the “Irish Clergyman,” or at least of what the “Irish Clergyman” saw and heard. There was a pretended interpretation. Two brothers (respectable shipbuilders at port Glasgow, of the name of M’D – ), and their sister, were the chief persons who spoke, with a Gaelic maid-servant, in the tongues, and a Mrs. J. – , in English. J. M’D – spoke, on the occasion alluded to, for about a quarter of an hour, with great energy and fluency, in a semi-latin sounding speech – then sung a hymn in the same. Having finished, he knelt down and prayed there might be an interpretation; as God had given one gift, that He would add the other. His sister got up at the opposite side of the room, and professed to give the interpretation; but it was a string of texts on overcoming, and no hymn, and one, if not more, of the texts was quoted wrongly. Just afterwards there was a bustle; and apparently some one was unwell and went into the next room; and the gifted English-speaking person, with utterances from the highest pitch of voice to the lowest murmur, with all strange prolongation of tones, spoke through (if one may so express oneself, as if passing through) the agony of Christ. Once the Gaelic servant spoke briefly in “a tongue;” not, if the “Irish Clergyman” remembers right, the same evening. The sense he had of the want of the power of the Holy Ghost in the church made him willing to hear and see. Yet he went rather as deputed for others than for himself.
“The excitement was great, so that, though not particularly an excitable person, he felt its effects very strongly. It did not certainly approve itself to his judgement; other things contributed to form it. It was too much of a scene. Previous to the time of exercising the gifts, they read, sung psalms, and prayed, under certain persons’ providence (one of them a very estimable person, who has since seen free from all this, and a minister of an independent or some dissenting church in Edinburgh, then a church-elder). This being finished, the “Irish Clergyman” was going away, when another said to him, “Don’t go: the best part is probably to come yet.” So he stayed, and heard what has just been related. He was courteously admitted, as one not believing, who came to see what was the real truth of the case. The parties are mostly dead, or dispersed, and many freed from the delusion, and the thing itself public; so that he does not feel that he is guilty of any indiscretion in giving a correct account of what passed.
“It may be added, without of course saying anything that could point out the persons, that female vanity, and very distinct worldliness, did not confirm, to his mind, the thought that it could be the Spirit’s power. The M’D – s were in ordinary life quiet, sober men, and, he believes, most blameless. Their names were so public that there is no indelicacy in alluding to them.” (From “The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby” second ed., Vol 6, pp 448-450, William Kelly, ed., London, G. Morrish, not dated.)

Further evidence against the accusation that Darby got this idea from Margaret MacDonald’s supposed vision is Darby’s opinion of her group as a whole. He wrote:

“The people called Irvingites have been plainly convicted elsewhere of so much false doctrine, false practice, and false prophecy, and that by many of the Church of God, as to make it, when known, a question only of preserving God’s children against the deceits and crafts of Satan... they have been often charged with holding the sinful humanity of Christ, and many of their teachers and disciples have, to the writer of this and to other persons avowed it -- that He had the carnal mind, but kept it down or dead. Mr. Irving, bold and fearless in the statement of what he held, declared that his nature bristled with sin like quills upon a porcupine; and that the nature with which the Son of man was clothed poured forth from the center of its inmost will streams as black as hell; and that the Augean stable of this nature was given Him to cleanse; and, what was most material, the spirit which they profess to be the Holy Ghost, though it might not sanction the language, expressly sanctioned the doctrine, the doctrine to which it gave its sanction being, that the law of sin was there all-present.
“Now this was so plainly wicked and evil, and contrary to God’s word and Spirit, that they have, since they have been pressed with it, taken great pains, at least the subtler ones among them, to disclaim and deny this. I say the subtler ones; because it has been not long since avowed by some of their teachers to the writer of this. The way they have gotten over the Spirit’s having sanctioned it is, that they were not answerable for what was said, that is, in utterance by the Spirit, before the ordinances were set up. One of these very ordinances said to the writer of this, that the Spirit might have said it through prejudice to please Mr. Irving. I only mention this to shew the unhappy degradation to which men may be reduced by giving way to the leadings of an evil spirit.” (From “The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby” second ed., Vol 15, pp 3-4, William Kelly, ed., London, G. Morrish, not dated.)

But it is not only the group that Darby condemned as Satanic, but their alleged prophetic visions. He further wrote that “It may not be generally known that the ‘gifts’ among the Irvingites were founded on this doctrine of Christ being a sinner in nature like ourselves. Mr. Irving’s statement was that he had long preached the ‘gifts,’ but there was nothing for the Holy Ghost to testify to; but when he preached this doctrine they came as a witness to it. His teaching moreover on the subject was confirmed by what was received as the prophetic power amongst them.” (From “The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby” second ed., Vol 6, pp 450-451, William Kelly, ed., London, G. Morrish, not dated.)

Finally, Margaret MacDonald’s own notes of this alleged vision plainly show that, although it included a pre-tribulation rapture of some of the saints of God, this was only a partial rapture. If Darby had been relying on any supposed authority behind this alleged vision, he would have made his rapture doctrine a similar partial rapture, instead of the universal rapture of all true believers in Christ which he taught, and which almost all pre-tribbers still teach today.

Margaret MacDonald wrote of this alleged vision, “It was a glorious light above the brightness of the sun, that shone round about me. I felt that those who were filled with the spirit could see spiritual things, and feel walking in the midst of them, while those who had not the Spirit could see nothing - so that two shall be in one bed, the one taken and the other left, because the one has the light of God within while the other cannot see the Kingdom of Heaven. I saw the people of God in an awfully dangerous situation, surrounded by nets and entanglements, about to be tried, and many about to be deceived and fall. Now will THE WICKED be revealed, with all power and signs and lying wonders, so that if it were possible the very elect will be deceived. - This is the fiery trial which is to try us - It will be for the purging and purifying of the real members of the body of Jesus; but Oh it will be a fiery trial. Every soul will be shaken to the very center. The enemy will try to shake in every thing we have believed - But the trial of real faith will be found to honor and praise and glory. Nothing but what is of God will stand. The stony-ground hearers will be made manifest - the love of many will wax cold I frequently said that night, and often since, now shall the awful sight of a false Christ be seen on this earth. and nothing but the living Christ in us can detect this awful attempt of the enemy to deceive - or it is with all deceivableness of unrighteousness he will work - he will have a counter part for every part of God's truth and an imitation for every work of the Spirit. The Spirit must and will be poured out on the church, that she may be purified and filled with God - and just in proportion as the Spirit of God works, so will he when our Lord anoints men with power, so will he. This is particularly the nature of the trial, through which those are to pass who will be counted worthy to stand before the Son of man. There will be outward trial too, but `tis principally temptation. It is brought on by the outpouring of the Spirit, and will just increase in proportion as the Spirit is poured out. The trial of the Church is from Antichrist. It is by being filled with the Spirit that we shall be kept.” (This is from Robert Norton's book “Memoirs of James & George Macdonald of Port-Glasgow” (1840), pp. 171-176. The account was also published in shorter form in his book “The Restoration of Apostles and Prophets; In the Catholic Apostolic Church” (1861), pp 15-18. It is reproduced in full in Dave MacPherson’s book “The Incredible Cover-up” and is available at a number of sites on the internet.)
 
Last edited:

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟554,225.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
As my paper was longer that the posting limit of 15000 words, the rest of it is here.

MacPherson’s book was wildly popular, and as it circulated the accusations morphed and grew, as rumors always do. Soon many became confused and began to claim that Margaret MacDonald was a member of Darby’s group, which was called the Plymouth brethren. The falsehood of this claim can easily be seen from the excerpts we have already examined. For we have seen that Darby visited the group (rather than being a member of it) and declared it to be Satanic in origin.

Then these misguided individuals began to say things like the Plymouth Brethren were an occult sect fond of summoning dead spirits and having tremendous visions. While this was at least partly true of the Catholic Apostolic Church, it was totally false in regard to the Plymouth Brethren. In 1878, when asked to define the position of Plymouth Brethren, J. N. Darby began by writing, “I hold, and I can add that we firmly hold, all the foundations of the Christian faith – the divinity of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, one God, eternally blessed – the divinity and humanity of the Lord Jesus, two natures in one person – His resurrection and His glorification at the right hand of God – the presence of the Holy Ghost here below, having descended on the day of Pentecost – the return of the Lord Jesus according to His promise. We believe also that the Father in His love has sent the Son to accomplish the work of redemption and grace towards men – that the Son came, finished the work which the Father gave Him to do on earth. We believe that He has made propitiation for our sins, and that after having accomplished it, He ascended to heaven – the High Priest seated at the right hand of the Majesty on high.
“Other truths are connected with these, such as the miraculous birth of the Saviour, who was absolutely without sin – and yet others; but, you will readily understand, sir, that my object is not to give a course of lectures or a theological summary, but to make it quite clear that it is in nowise on the giving up of the great foundations of the Christian faith that our position is based.”
(From “Letters of J. N. D.”, Vol 2, pg 513, second ed., London, G Morrish, 1914)

But not content with falsely claiming that Darby’s group, the Plymouth Brethren, was occultic, these malignant individuals next began to claim that this was the group of the noted Satanist Alister Crowley, and that they had even given him authority to preach. This is false on two counts. First, the Plymouth Brethren never give anyone authority to preach. They denounce this concept as unscriptural, saying the authority to preach comes from God, not from man.
(For evidence of this, see the article written by J. N. Darby titled “Christian Liberty of Preaching and Teaching the Lord Jesus Christ.” This can be found in “The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby” second ed., Vol 1, pp 104-122, William Kelly, ed., London, G. Morrish, not dated.)

But the second is far more to the point. Although Alister Crowley grew up in a Plymouth Brethren home, he rebelled against his Christian training at an early age and never joined the group. He discussed this rebellion in considerable detail in the fifth through the seventh chapters his autobiography, “The Confessions of Alister Crowley.” He dated its beginnings with his father’s death when he was eleven years old. By the time he was thirteen it was complete. His descriptions of the Plymouth Brethren and its various members are repeatedly couched in terms of utmost contempt. This autobiography is so wicked that I could not bear to read beyond the first seven chapters, but I did notice that further on in the book he stated (in chapter twelve) that he found the Anglican Church “as disgusting as the Plymouth Brethren.” No page numbers are given because I read this on the internet, where the entire book is published.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Big Mouth Nana

Post Tribulationist
Sep 9, 2003
6,812
246
75
Bakersfield,California
Visit site
✟30,590.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
This might have been interesting if it wasn't so LONG!!! I read about the first half of it and was irritated before I finished it!!!! This Darby fella, no matter how recognized in Christiandom had what I call the "Apostle Paul Syndrome". This statement that he made right here makes him sound like he is was operating under a spirit of pride just like Paul was in the beginning until God smoothed him out with the messenger of Satan 2 Cor 12:7. In fact, this verse came to mind when I read it..1 Cor 5:3... For I verily, as absent in body,but present in spirit, have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed,
“Very dear sister, – I hear that some of the sisters have had dreams about the coming of Jesus. This has given me uneasiness, for although absent in body, I am with you in spirit, desiring and seeking the good of all of you, the dear redeemed ones of our precious Saviour. Who is Darby to say that these two sisters didn't have dreams about the coming of Jesus!! I have had a dream or two about that, and so has my sister!! This man had about as much of the Spirit of God as a brick wall and didn't have a clue about the manifestations and workings of the Holy Spirit regarding dreams and tongues. He was operating out of his own beliefs, and not what the bible teaches regarding these areas with any Spiritual understanding.
This one blew me away...In addition to rejecting all supposed truth from extra-Biblical sources, Darby also rejected all teaching or preaching by women. He wrote that “I do not accept a woman’s going out to evangelize. I never saw a woman meddle in teaching and church matters, but she brought mischief upon herself and everyone else. Once again, something that Paul stated.. Cor 14:34-34.. Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law.
35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

Darby had the same problem with the customs and Laws that Paul had in the beginning. He couldn't shed them until he got the full revelation of who Jesus was and what He did...or did he ever??!! He had an "I" problem which is evident in the beginning of his Epistles which you can almost see where they smooth out in 1 Cor. Darby evidently never read this part of the Word..Gal 3:28 ~ There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
As far as Margaret McDonald, this is the same story that I have read on the internet PLUS that John Darby started this LIE. One thing for sure, the vision wasn't real or it was inspired by the Devil, as there is no such thing as a pre-trib rapture. I find it ironic that this leads to her AND John Darby in every account that I have read. I can't bring myself to read the rest of these posts regarding this topic.
John Nelson Darby...The doctrine of a secret rapture was first conceived by John Nelson Darby of the Plymouth Brethren in 1827. Darby, known as the father of dispensationalism, invented the doctrine claiming there were not one, but two "second comings." This teaching was immediately challenged as unbiblical by other members of the Brethren.
http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/cathouse/darby.htm

 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟554,225.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
This might have been interesting if it wasn't so LONG!!!

The point was not the rightness or the wrongness of Darby's attitude and doctrine, but simply that both his attitude and his doctrine, as expressed in his many published writings, plainly shows that he did not get the idea from Margaret MacDonald.

It seems that Darby never knew of the accusation that he got the idea from her, for he never answered it, But his close associate, William Kelly, heard of it about four months after Darby's death, and wrote a scathing denunciation, lamenting the fact that both the man making the accusation and the accuser were dead, so no one could ask either one about it.

As far as Margaret McDonald, this is the same story that I have read on the internet PLUS that John Darby started this LIE. One thing for sure, the vision wasn't real or it was inspired by the Devil, as there is no such thing as a pre-trib rapture. I find it ironic that this leads to her AND John Darby in every account that I have read. I can't bring myself to read the rest of these posts regarding this topic.
John Nelson Darby...The doctrine of a secret rapture was first conceived by John Nelson Darby of the Plymouth Brethren in 1827. Darby, known as the father of dispensationalism, invented the doctrine claiming there were not one, but two "second comings." This teaching was immediately challenged as unbiblical by other members of the Brethren.
http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/cathouse/darby.htm

Actually, though it is widely assumed that this idea originated with Darby, it has been demonstrated that it was taught by a Baptist preacher in the 1700's and by one other around twenty years before or after that (I forget which.) Later on, this doctrine was discovered in a paper which had never been translated into English and was written in ancient times. The paper claims to have been written by someone named Ephraim, but since scholars doubt that this was the well known Ephraim of Syria, they call this writer pseudo-Ephraim. I have a problem with that title because there could obviously been another person named Ephraim, and the paper does not profess to have been written by Ephraim of Syria, but only by Ephraim. There are six know ancient copies of this document, in three different languages. One of them names the author as Isadore of Seville. Based on internal evidence in the document itself, various scholars have estimated its actual date of writing as early as 373 to as late as 627. But the six ancient documents already referred to were all known to have already been in church libraries before the year 800, that is, a thousand years before Darby was even born!

But in any case, this makes at least three individuals that advanced this doctrine before John Nelson Darby was even born. (He was, if I remember correctly, born in 1801, but it may have been in 1800.)
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Big Mouth Nana

Post Tribulationist
Sep 9, 2003
6,812
246
75
Bakersfield,California
Visit site
✟30,590.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Actually, though it is widely assumed that this idea originated with Darby, it has been demonstrated that it was taught by a Baptist preacher in the 1700's and by one other around twenty years before or after that (I forget which.) Later on, this doctrine was discovered in a paper which had never been translated into English and was written before the year 500. The paper claims to have been written by someone named Ephraim, but since scholars doubt that this was the well known Ephraim of Syria, they call this writer pseudo-Ephraim. I have a problem with that title because there could obviously been another person named Ephraim, and the paper does not profess to have been written by Ephraim of Syria, but only by Ephraim.
According to what I just read, Ephrem the Syrian was a post tribulationist from the 4th century. That is going way back there. From other sources that I have read pre-trib came from Clement and Origen, and passed down to Augustine. There was a long line of men teaching this doctrine after these, then the Margaret McDonald..so called vision, but was popularized by John Darby. It has spread like wild fire through men such as William Blackstone in 1908 who wrote a book entitled..Jesus is Coming which sold 1 million copies. It had further spred from pre-trib proponents as John Wolvoord, Dwight Pentecost in 1958 sold 215,000 copies of his book, Hal Lindsay..who has had many prophetic farces that never came to pass and wrote the Late Great Planet Earth which sold between 15 million and 35 million copies, 1995 Tim Lahaye's Left Behind books that sold tens of millions of copies. Boy, Satan has been a busy little Bee with this false doctrine!!

But in any case, this makes at least three individuals that advanced this doctrine before John Nelson Darby was even born. (He was, if I remember correctly, born in 1801, but it may have been in 1800.)
I believe that it is part of the great deception, and it has definitely worked :mad:
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

garry2

Well-Known Member
Apr 4, 2007
2,721
25
✟3,053.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Biblewriter:
Finally, Margaret MacDonald’s own notes of this alleged vision plainly show that, although it included a pre-tribulation rapture of some of the saints of God, this was only a partial rapture. If Darby had been relying on any supposed authority behind this alleged vision, he would have made his rapture doctrine a similar partial rapture, instead of the universal rapture of all true believers in Christ which he taught, and which almost all pre-tribbers still teach today.

Yes, but those rejecting Bible verses for words from men are not true believers even though they claim to be.
To be a Christian but rejecting truth (no oil - no Holy Spirit) means being locked out.
 
Upvote 0
B

Bible2

Guest
Biblewriter posted in message #1:

The doctrine of the pre-tribulation rapture has been
widely disparaged with a false accusation concerning
its origin.

The doctrine of a pre-tribulation rapture should be
widely disparaged with the true accusation concerning
its falsity, regardless of its origin. Nowhere does
the Bible ever teach a pre-tribulation rapture, but
teaches the exact opposite: Jesus' coming to gather
together (rapture) the Church will be after the
tribulation (Matthew 24:29-31, Mark 13:24); Jesus'
coming to gather together (rapture) the Church
(2 Thessalonians 2:1) must destroy the Antichrist
(2 Thessalonians 2:8). The Church will have to suffer
and die under the Antichrist (Revelation 13:7-10,
14:12-13, 20:4).

Biblewriter posted in message #1:

This doctrine was popularized by John nelson Darby in
the 1800's. (This is the man who coined the term "the
rapture" for Christ’s coming to take his own out of
the world.)

No scripture teaches that Christ is coming to take His
own out of the world. The Church will never be removed
from the earth (Proverbs 10:30, John 17:15). The
rapture is simply the catching up of the Church into
the clouds to meet Jesus in the air on His way down
to the earth at His second coming (1 Thessalonians
4:15-17).

Biblewriter quoted Darby in message #1:

"... Let them not allow themselves to be carried away
by their imagination, lest they should fall into the
snare of the enemy, and lest he should take advantage
of this to shake the faith of some."

That is ironic, for the pre-tribulation rapture is not
only a figment of the imagination, but could very well
cause the faith of many to be seriously shaken when it
does not occur and they find themselves in the
tribulation. They could become so "offended" (Matthew
13:21, 24:10) that God didn't rapture them before the
tribulation that they could depart from the faith
altogether (1 Timothy 4:1) during the long suffering
of the tribulation (Isaiah 8:21-22).
 
Upvote 0
B

Bible2

Guest
garry2 posted in message #6:

Luke 12
36 And ye yourselves like unto men that wait for
their lord, when he will return from the wedding;
that when he comethand knocketh, they may open unto
him immediately.

Luke 12:36 is a parable; the Church (addressed
throughout Luke 12:32-40) is to be "like" servants
waiting for their employer to come back from a
wedding.

The wedding of the Church will not occur until
Revelation 19:7, after the entire tribulation of
Revelation chapters 6-18.
 
Upvote 0

garry2

Well-Known Member
Apr 4, 2007
2,721
25
✟3,053.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Luke 12:36 is a parable; the Church (addressed
throughout Luke 12:32-40) is to be "like" servants
waiting for their employer to come back from a
wedding.

And so the church is waiting for their employer (Jesus) to come back from a wedding, what wedding?
The church and Jesus is that wedding.
Luke 12:36 is about those that have come to believe through the final years of tribulation.
Christ is returning from His wedding with the bride after the catching up to Him and before His return which is so clear, only changing the words of this verse would make it say diffrently.

The wedding of the Church will not occur until
Revelation 19:7, after the entire tribulation of
Revelation chapters 6-18.
That's what you say, but scripture dosn't.

 
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟554,225.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
The Church will never be removed
from the earth (Proverbs 10:30, John 17:15).

Your post contained many unprovable assumptions, including that there is only one future coming mentioned in scripture, While you can rightly point out that no scripture specifically says there will be more than one coming, there is also no scripture that says there will only be one. We have already noticed that no Old Testament scripture said that Christ would come more than once, but that the difference in the various prophecies clearly indicated it , even though it was never stated.

Your post also included one purely fabricated detail, that is, that the rapture occurs while the Lord is coming down to judge the world. This is not even hinted at anywhere in scripture.

But the statement I quoted above is not only an unprovable assumption. It goes beyond a purely fabricated detail. It is flatly contradicted by explicitly stated scripture. Jesus said, "In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also." (John 14:2-3)

This promise contains three elements.

1 There are many mansions in my Father's house.

2 I am going (there) to prepare a place for you.

3 I will come again to take you where I am.

In actual fact, Jesus physically left this earth and went to heaven, as we read in Acts 1:9-11. "And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven."

Scripture warns that they that are unlearned and unstable wrest the scriptures. This is what you have done, taking scriptures that are about totally different subjects and mis-applying them to the Lord's coming.
 
Upvote 0

garry2

Well-Known Member
Apr 4, 2007
2,721
25
✟3,053.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Scripture warns that they that are unlearned and unstable wrest the scriptures. This is what you have done, taking scriptures that are about totally different subjects and mis-applying them to the Lord's coming.

Also:
Ecclesiates 5
7 For in the multitude of dreams and many words there are also divers vanities: but fear thou God.
 
Upvote 0

zeke37

IMO...
May 24, 2007
11,706
225
✟35,694.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Your post contained many unprovable assumptions, including that there is only one future coming mentioned in scripture, While you can rightly point out that no scripture specifically says there will be more than one coming, there is also no scripture that says there will only be one. We have already noticed that no Old Testament scripture said that Christ would come more than once, but that the difference in the various prophecies clearly indicated it , even though it was never stated.

Your post also included one purely fabricated detail, that is, that the rapture occurs while the Lord is coming down to judge the world. This is not even hinted at anywhere in scripture.

But the statement I quoted above is not only an unprovable assumption. It goes beyond a purely fabricated detail. It is flatly contradicted by explicitly stated scripture. Jesus said, "In my Father’s house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also." (John 14:2-3)

This promise contains three elements.

1 There are many mansions in my Father's house.

2 I am going (there) to prepare a place for you.

3 I will come again to take you where I am.

In actual fact, Jesus physically left this earth and went to heaven, as we read in Acts 1:9-11. "And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight. And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven."

Scripture warns that they that are unlearned and unstable wrest the scriptures. This is what you have done, taking scriptures that are about totally different subjects and mis-applying them to the Lord's coming.
you are the one that is doing just that...John14:2-3 has nothing to do with the rapture......is not a pre trib rapture event...it is for all believers from all time, and only ignorance would dare say otherwise.
 
Upvote 0

garry2

Well-Known Member
Apr 4, 2007
2,721
25
✟3,053.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
Isaiah 26
19 Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust: for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.
20 Come, my people (Rapture), enter thou into thy chambers, and shut thy doors about thee: hide thyself as it were for a little moment, until the indignation be overpast.
21 For, behold, the LORD cometh out of his place (Heaven) to punish the inhabitants of the earth for their iniquity: the earth also shall disclose her blood, and shall no more cover her slain.
 
Upvote 0

Biblewriter

Senior Member
Site Supporter
May 15, 2005
11,935
1,498
Ocala, Florida
Visit site
✟554,225.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
you are the one that is doing just that...John14:2-3 has nothing to do with the rapture......is not a pre trib rapture event...it is for all believers from all time, and only ignorance would dare say otherwise.

How can you possibly conclude that "I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there you may be also." (John 14:3) Has nothing to do with the rapture? It is true that this passage says nothing about the timing of this event. We find that in other scriptures. But to question that it speaks of the rapture strains credulity.
 
Upvote 0

zeke37

IMO...
May 24, 2007
11,706
225
✟35,694.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
well, that teaching is for all of us....from those who actually were there to hear it, and us today.

I mean that it is not specific to ONLY those individuals that supposedly will be pre trib raptured. it is not a pre trib proof....



Either when we die in the flesh, OR when the alive at His Coming are Gathered to Him....then we are with Him forever...the place He has prepared is the REST that we have in Him...not a a building...a resting place...we rest in Him....He became our Sabbath

this promise was evident after His death, when He fulfilled certain scripture and did just as stated in John 14. The place is prepared...

so either we die in the flesh and go to be with Him...or we are those who are alive at His Coming, and Gathered to Him together with those returning cloud of witnesses...the dead believers...and we go to be with Him...forever and ever...right here on earth for the Millennium....and beyond....
 
Upvote 0

garry2

Well-Known Member
Apr 4, 2007
2,721
25
✟3,053.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
well, that teaching is for all of us....from those who actually were there to hear it, and us today.

I mean that it is not specific to ONLY those individuals that supposedly will be pre trib raptured. it is not a pre trib proof....



Either when we die in the flesh, OR when the alive at His Coming are Gathered to Him....then we are with Him forever...the place He has prepared is the REST that we have in Him...not a a building...a resting place...we rest in Him....He became our Sabbath

this promise was evident after His death, when He fulfilled certain scripture and did just as stated in John 14. The place is prepared...

so either we die in the flesh and go to be with Him...or we are those who are alive at His Coming, and Gathered to Him together with those returning cloud of witnesses...the dead believers...and we go to be with Him...forever and ever...right here on earth for the Millennium....and beyond....
Completely false:
1 Thessalonians 4
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.

We are caught up to meet the Lord in the clouds in the air.

Saying other than what the scripture says is a lie.
 
Upvote 0

zeke37

IMO...
May 24, 2007
11,706
225
✟35,694.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Conservatives
I did not say other than scripture....but I mean the actual scripture...not the translations...

we that are elect firstfruits....are alive to be seized (not caught up or raptured) at His Coming, together with the returning cloud of witnesses that have passed on (died in the flesh) and who are with Christ now....they come here with Him and we(who are the alive portion of the firstfruits) are gathered together with them....right here on earth according to Rev14 and many other scriptures.

UP is not in the manuscripts...but ADDED by man.

so who is doing what now?



I know YOU believe that the cloud is a rain cloud...but Paul gives us proof that he uses the term to mean a great multitude in Hebrews...

so while I have a basis for my understanding which stems from Paul's other scriptures you do not., since Paul wrote the one we are speaking of...who should we believe? Paul or men that wrote about Paul 1000's of years later.


a cloud can mean more than just a rain cloud...and I have proof of Paul using it to mean mass multitude (of believers) (Heb) just like the mass multitude that comes with Christ in 1Thes4,,,,told many times. over in scripture...so why would it be different now??? Scripture repeats this over and over again...so why think any different, lest by tradition....or addition.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

garry2

Well-Known Member
Apr 4, 2007
2,721
25
✟3,053.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
In Relationship
I did not say other than scripture....

You certinally did as I will show.

but I mean the actual scripture...not the translations...

You did not stick to the actual scripture, but gave your wrong translation, as I will show.

we that are elect firstfruits....are alive to be seized (not caught up or raptured) at His Coming,

Seized - caught up, is the same thing.

G726
ἁρπάζω

harpazō

har-pad'-zo

From a derivative of G138; to seize (in various applications): - catch (away, up), pluck, pull, take (by force).



together with the returning cloud of witnesses

You have added the word witnesses to this verse to make your false argument that Christ does not come on a cloud but comes with a lot of witnesses.

that have passed on (died in the flesh) and who are with Christ now....they come here with Him and we(who are the alive portion of the firstfruits) are gathered together with them....right here on earth according to Rev14 and many other scriptures.

No in the rapture we are caught up to Christ in the cloud in the air, just as scripture says, nothing there about being gathered to Him on earth.

UP is not in the manuscripts...but ADDED by man.

Wrong, harpazo - seize,catch up.

so who is doing what now?

You are, adding to scripture - (witnesses) to 1 Thessalonians 4:17, for one.


I know YOU believe that the cloud is a rain cloud...

No I have never believed that, I actually thing it is a Heavenly cloud, like the one Jesus was caught up in, like the one the two witnesses will be caught up in, like the one God spoke to Moses from and led the Israelites in while in the wilderness, like the one The Father appeared in to Jesus.

Acts1
9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.

Revelation 11
12 And they heard a great voice from heaven saying unto them, Come up hither. And they ascended up to heaven in a cloud; and their enemies beheld them.

Exodus 24
16 And the glory of the LORD abode upon mount Sinai, and the cloud covered it six days: and the seventh day he called unto Moses out of the midst of the cloud.

5 While he yet spake, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.


but Paul gives us proof that he uses the term to mean a great multitude in Hebrews...

Where Paul wrote of a cloud of witnesses (many witnesses) had nothing at all to do with the seising catching up to God.
He mentioned the word witnesses in Hebrews 12, the word witnesses is not in 1 Thessalonians 4:17 except when you add to scripture and place it there.

Hebrews12
1 Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,


1Th 4:17 Then1899 we2249 which are alive2198 and remain4035 shall be caught up726 together260 with4862 them846 in1722 the clouds3507 to meet1519, 529 the3588 Lord2962 in1519 the air:109 and2532 so3779 shall we ever3842 be2071 with4862 the Lord.2962

G726

ἁρπάζω

harpazō

har-pad'-zo

From a derivative of G138; to seize (in various applications): - catch (away, up), pluck, pull, take (by force).

G3507

νεφέλη

nephelē

nef-el'-ay

From G3509; properly cloudiness, that is, (concretely) a cloud: - cloud.




G109

ἀήρ

aēr

ah-ayr'

From
ἄημι aēmi (to breathe unconsciously, that is, respire; by analogy to blow); "air" (as naturally circumambient): - air. Compare G5594.

so while I have a basis for my understanding which stems from Paul's other scriptures you do not.,

You do not have understanding of scripture, your understanding comes from making scripture say what your sect have taught you to believe.

since Paul wrote the one we are speaking of...who should we believe? Paul or men that wrote about Paul 1000's of years later.

I believe Paul, but you don't or you would not add to 1 Thessalonians 4:17 and others.


a cloud can mean more than just a rain cloud...and I have proof of Paul using it to mean mass multitude (of believers) (Heb)

In Hebrews 12, yes, but in most instances in the Bible a cloud is just that a literal cloud whether rain cloud or cloud from Heaven, I posted four verses of many showing this.(above)
Your saying that cloud means a lot of witnesses in most cases is nothing short of an untruth.

just like the mass multitude that comes with Christ in 1Thes4

In 1 Thessalonians 4, no.

Christ comes with the spirits of those who have died in Him, the spirits are reunited with their changed-glorified bodies, as we who are left alive are changed to our glorified - redeemed bodies and rise to meet the Lord in the clouds in the air.

1 Thessalonians 4
14 For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him.
16 For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.


,,,,told many times. over in scripture...so why would it be different now??? Scripture repeats this over and over again...so why think any different, lest by tradition....or addition.

No, scripture does not repeat over and over again that cloud means a multitude of people, scripture on most ocassions where cloud is mentioned makes it clear that it is a literal cloud.
How can you be so wrong and seriously believe that?

 
Upvote 0
B

Bible2

Guest
garry2 posted in message #10:

Bible2 had posted:

Luke 12:36 is a parable; the Church (addressed
throughout Luke 12:32-40) is to be "like" servants
waiting for their employer to come back from a
wedding.

And so the church is waiting for their employer
(Jesus) to come back from a wedding, what wedding?

In the parable of Luke 12:36, the church is to be
"like" house-servants (any house-servants) waiting
for their employer (any employer) to come back home
from the wedding (any wedding) that their employer
has gone to. The idea is that the festivities of the
wedding (any wedding) can go on long into the night,
and so the house-servants must stay alert and ready
for their employer's return home no matter how late
he comes back (Luke 12:38).

garry2 posted in message #10:

The church and Jesus is that wedding.

In the parable of Luke 12:36, the wedding is not the
wedding of Jesus to the church, for the parable and
its context is addressed to the church (Luke 12:12,32-43).

garry2 posted in message #10:

Luke 12:36 is about those that have come to believe
through the final years of tribulation.
Christ is returning from His wedding with the bride
after the catching up to Him and before His return
which is so clear, only changing the words of this
verse would make it say diffrently.

The wedding of Jesus to the church is shown as
happening in Revelation 19:7, after the entire
tribulation of Revelation chapters 6-18, because
that's when the rapture of the church will occur
(Matthew 24:29-31). The coming of Jesus to gather
together the church must destroy the Antichrist
(2 Thessalonians 2:1,8), just as we see Jesus
destroying the Antichrist in Revelation 19:20. Before
that, the church will have suffered and died under the
Antichrist (Revelation 13:7-10, 14:12-13, 20:4).

Nowhere does the Bible ever refer to a rapture before
the tribulation or to a wedding of Jesus to the
church during the tribulation. These are man-made
ideas, and very unseemly, as if Jesus would marry just
part of the church while the rest of it is suffering
and dying on the earth (Revelation 13:7-10, 14:12-13,
20:4). There are no believers outside of the church
(Ephesians 4:4-5; 1 Corinthians 12:13).
 
Upvote 0