The following is pasted with permission of the Author Ellis
Skolfield. http://www.ellisskolfield.com/downloadable-books.shtml
or in HTML
http://www.beholdthebeast.com/end_time_myth.htm
An End-Time Myth
A widely held end-time view is that a seven-year time of
trouble will take place at the end of this age. Few know the
origin of the doctrine and the Great Tribulation (as it is called)
is generally accepted as an established fact. But just having an
explanation for a few puzzling Bible verses doesn't mean the
explanation is true.
As popular as the Seven-Year Tribulation view might be, it
might also be wrong because there is no direct scriptural
support for it. Oh, there are verses we interpret as a sevenyear-
tribulation, but not one verse in the Bible says we are
going to have such a time at the end of the age. Few question
the origin of the view, but it had a most dubious beginning . .
. and here's the story.
From the early Church fathers until the Reformation, the
generally accepted view of Bible prophecy was "linear historic,"
that Revelation was in the process of being fulfilled
throughout the Christian Era. But in the 16th century, a new
view of Bible prophecy was devised by a Jesuit priest to stop
the Reformers from teaching that the Catholic Church was
probably the "harlot of Babylon" of Revelation 17:3-6.
In 1591AD, the Jesuit Ribera invented a .futurist. view. He
claimed that Revelation would not be fulfilled until the end of
the Christian Era. Ribera taught a rebuilt Babylon, a rebuilt
temple in Jerusalem and an end-time Antichrist, etc., etc.
Sound familiar? It should, Ribera is the father of the prophetic
views taught by many major denominations today.
But Ribera is only part of the story. In 1731, there was a
Spanish family living in Chili named the de Lacunzas, who had
a boy named Manuel. After fifteen years at home, young
2
Manuel decided to become a Catholic priest so he boarded a
ship to Spain. Thirty-six years later (when the Jesuits were
expelled from that country because of their brutality) the now
"Father" Manuel de Lacunza y Diaz had to move to Imola, Italy,
where he remained for the rest of his life.
In Imola, de Lacunza claimed to be a converted Jew named
Rabbi Juan Jushafat Ben-Ezra. Under that alias, he wrote a 900
page book titled The Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty. In
it, Lacunza theorized that the Church would be taken to be
with the Lord some 45 days before Jesus' final return to Earth.
During that 45 days (while the Church was in heaven), God
was supposedly going to pour out His wrath upon the wicked
remaining on Earth.1 Believe it or not, a Chilean Jesuit, a.k.a.
a Jewish Rabbi, theorized the earliest mini-trib, pre-trib-rapture
view on record!2 But to continue on . . .
De Lacunza died in Imola in 1801 and that should have been
the end of it. But after his death, Lacunza's views were taught
in Spain. In 1812 his book was published in Spanish. Fourteen
years later, it was translated into English by a radical cultist
named Edward Irving. Lacunza's views could have died there,
too, for most in England saw Irving as a heretic.
But now the plot thickens. About the same time, an Irvingite
evangelist named Robert Norton met a little Scottish girl
named Margaret Macdonald who supposedly had a vision of
the church being secretly raptured. Norton was so charmed by
the idea that he preached her "vision" all over England.
_______________________
Footnotes
1 De Lacunza derived his view from a premature interpretation of the 1290 and the 1335
days of Dan 12:11-12. We now know his view to be faulty because we now have the true
fulfillment of those prophecies in the new nation of Israel and can prove with certainty
what those "days" really mean. You can read the details in Skolfield's book The False
Prophet, also downloadable from this site.
2 Though not so well known, an 18th century American pastor, Morgan Edwards,
may have published a pre-trib rapture paper slightly earlier than de Lacunza. But
when one looks at the tremendous impact the Scofield Bible had on the western
church, it appears that Ribera-Lacunza-Macdonald-Darby-Scofield is the route
through which this view gained wide acceptance. A copy of Irving's translation of
Lacunza's work is archived in Oxford University Library, Oxford, England. (John
Brey, The Origin of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture Teaching, pp1-12)
______________________________
3
John Darby, founder of the Plymouth Brethren, became
interested in this new doctrine so he attended several Irvingite
meetings. In his letters Darby states that he had "come to an
understanding of this new truth" and made no secret of the fact
that he had been influenced by de Lacunza's writings.
Darby, however, wasn't satisfied with the rather simplistic
Lacunza-Irving 45-day tribulation idea, so he devised a more
complex scheme. Darby thought the last week of Daniel's 70
weeks (Dan 9:24-27) was still unfulfilled so he theorized that
the 70th week might actually be a future seven-year-tribulation
that would take place at the end of the Christian Era. To make
his idea fit world history, he also invented a 2000 year gap
between Daniel's 69th and 70th weeks. It was all guesswork
theology, but there you have it, the true origin of the sevenyear-
tribulation and pre-trib rapture doctrines! Upon that
dubious foundation, Darby and his associates then added a few
of Jesuit Ribera's wrinkles:
1. That a Jewish temple would be rebuilt and animal
sacrifices reestablished.
2. That Antichrist would appear and rule the world for
seven years.
3. That after 3½ years of good rule, this supposed
Antichrist would turn against the Jews, stop the sacrifices,
and start the battle of Armageddon.
Whew, it went on and on in a dizzying profusion of unsupportable
conjectures, all based upon Darby's imaginary 2000
year gap theory and the seven-year-tribulation he conjured up
from Daniel's 70th week.
Continued
Skolfield. http://www.ellisskolfield.com/downloadable-books.shtml
or in HTML
http://www.beholdthebeast.com/end_time_myth.htm
An End-Time Myth
A widely held end-time view is that a seven-year time of
trouble will take place at the end of this age. Few know the
origin of the doctrine and the Great Tribulation (as it is called)
is generally accepted as an established fact. But just having an
explanation for a few puzzling Bible verses doesn't mean the
explanation is true.
As popular as the Seven-Year Tribulation view might be, it
might also be wrong because there is no direct scriptural
support for it. Oh, there are verses we interpret as a sevenyear-
tribulation, but not one verse in the Bible says we are
going to have such a time at the end of the age. Few question
the origin of the view, but it had a most dubious beginning . .
. and here's the story.
From the early Church fathers until the Reformation, the
generally accepted view of Bible prophecy was "linear historic,"
that Revelation was in the process of being fulfilled
throughout the Christian Era. But in the 16th century, a new
view of Bible prophecy was devised by a Jesuit priest to stop
the Reformers from teaching that the Catholic Church was
probably the "harlot of Babylon" of Revelation 17:3-6.
In 1591AD, the Jesuit Ribera invented a .futurist. view. He
claimed that Revelation would not be fulfilled until the end of
the Christian Era. Ribera taught a rebuilt Babylon, a rebuilt
temple in Jerusalem and an end-time Antichrist, etc., etc.
Sound familiar? It should, Ribera is the father of the prophetic
views taught by many major denominations today.
But Ribera is only part of the story. In 1731, there was a
Spanish family living in Chili named the de Lacunzas, who had
a boy named Manuel. After fifteen years at home, young
2
Manuel decided to become a Catholic priest so he boarded a
ship to Spain. Thirty-six years later (when the Jesuits were
expelled from that country because of their brutality) the now
"Father" Manuel de Lacunza y Diaz had to move to Imola, Italy,
where he remained for the rest of his life.
In Imola, de Lacunza claimed to be a converted Jew named
Rabbi Juan Jushafat Ben-Ezra. Under that alias, he wrote a 900
page book titled The Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty. In
it, Lacunza theorized that the Church would be taken to be
with the Lord some 45 days before Jesus' final return to Earth.
During that 45 days (while the Church was in heaven), God
was supposedly going to pour out His wrath upon the wicked
remaining on Earth.1 Believe it or not, a Chilean Jesuit, a.k.a.
a Jewish Rabbi, theorized the earliest mini-trib, pre-trib-rapture
view on record!2 But to continue on . . .
De Lacunza died in Imola in 1801 and that should have been
the end of it. But after his death, Lacunza's views were taught
in Spain. In 1812 his book was published in Spanish. Fourteen
years later, it was translated into English by a radical cultist
named Edward Irving. Lacunza's views could have died there,
too, for most in England saw Irving as a heretic.
But now the plot thickens. About the same time, an Irvingite
evangelist named Robert Norton met a little Scottish girl
named Margaret Macdonald who supposedly had a vision of
the church being secretly raptured. Norton was so charmed by
the idea that he preached her "vision" all over England.
_______________________
Footnotes
1 De Lacunza derived his view from a premature interpretation of the 1290 and the 1335
days of Dan 12:11-12. We now know his view to be faulty because we now have the true
fulfillment of those prophecies in the new nation of Israel and can prove with certainty
what those "days" really mean. You can read the details in Skolfield's book The False
Prophet, also downloadable from this site.
2 Though not so well known, an 18th century American pastor, Morgan Edwards,
may have published a pre-trib rapture paper slightly earlier than de Lacunza. But
when one looks at the tremendous impact the Scofield Bible had on the western
church, it appears that Ribera-Lacunza-Macdonald-Darby-Scofield is the route
through which this view gained wide acceptance. A copy of Irving's translation of
Lacunza's work is archived in Oxford University Library, Oxford, England. (John
Brey, The Origin of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture Teaching, pp1-12)
______________________________
3
John Darby, founder of the Plymouth Brethren, became
interested in this new doctrine so he attended several Irvingite
meetings. In his letters Darby states that he had "come to an
understanding of this new truth" and made no secret of the fact
that he had been influenced by de Lacunza's writings.
Darby, however, wasn't satisfied with the rather simplistic
Lacunza-Irving 45-day tribulation idea, so he devised a more
complex scheme. Darby thought the last week of Daniel's 70
weeks (Dan 9:24-27) was still unfulfilled so he theorized that
the 70th week might actually be a future seven-year-tribulation
that would take place at the end of the Christian Era. To make
his idea fit world history, he also invented a 2000 year gap
between Daniel's 69th and 70th weeks. It was all guesswork
theology, but there you have it, the true origin of the sevenyear-
tribulation and pre-trib rapture doctrines! Upon that
dubious foundation, Darby and his associates then added a few
of Jesuit Ribera's wrinkles:
1. That a Jewish temple would be rebuilt and animal
sacrifices reestablished.
2. That Antichrist would appear and rule the world for
seven years.
3. That after 3½ years of good rule, this supposed
Antichrist would turn against the Jews, stop the sacrifices,
and start the battle of Armageddon.
Whew, it went on and on in a dizzying profusion of unsupportable
conjectures, all based upon Darby's imaginary 2000
year gap theory and the seven-year-tribulation he conjured up
from Daniel's 70th week.
Continued
