Hi all, here's a think piece I found on the web. Any reactions?)
Pretrib Rapture Pride
Pretrib rapture promoters like Thomas Ice give the impression they know more than the early Church Fathers, the Reformers, the greatest Greek New Testament scholars including those who produced the KJV Bible, the founders of their favorite Bible schools, and even their own mentors!
I have personally discussed prophecy with Thomas Ice, and agree that he seems to think his opinion is final truth. But that is not significant to the question at hand.
One of the earliest of the early church fathers was Irenaeus, who sometime between 186 and 188 published the most famous non-inspired Christian work of ancient times. That work was titled “Against Heresies,” and is very long. The last chapters of this work are the very oldest surviving Christian commentary on Bible prophecy of any significant length. (There were older ones, but all of them either were only short, or were not preserved.) Much of what Irenaeus wrote in these ten chapters sounds like it might have been written last week at Dallas Theological Seminary or Moody Bible Institute. At one point Irenaeus commented on the evil of the world in general, and then said, “And therefore, when in the end the Church shall be suddenly caught up from this, it is said, ‘There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be.’ For this is the last contest of the righteous, in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption.” (Against Heresies, by Irenaeus, book V, chapter XXIX, section 1)
We need to notice the following elements in this short statement:
First, the church will be "suddenly caught up."
Second, after the church is "Suddenly caught up," "There shall be tribulation such as has not been since the beginning, neither shall be." Lest anyone claim that this is not specifically stated to be after “the church is "suddenly caught up," please note that the grammatical construction (when) -- (one event takes place) -- (a second event takes place) has two possible meanings. It either means that the two events will take place at the same time or it means that the second event will take place after the first event. But it cannot mean that the second event takes place before the first event. In this case the first event is clearly instantaneous and the second event will obviously consume a significant period of time. So it is unreasonable to argue that the writer’s intention was anything other than to state that this “tribulation” would take place after the church is “suddenly caught up.”
Third, this period of tribulation is specifically called "the last contest of the righteous." and it explicitly says of these righteous in this particular contest, "in which, when they overcome they are crowned with incorruption." Some have imagined that this proves Irenaeus was not saying that the church is “suddenly caught up” before the “tribulation.” But it is standard pre-trib doctrine that after the church is removed from this earth, others will turn to God, and have to endure a great test of their faith in the time of Antichrist.
However, Irenaeus also said, “For all these and other words were unquestion-ably spoken in reference to the resurrection of the just, which takes place after the coming of Antichrist, and the destruction of all nations under his rule.” (“Against Heresies”, Book V, chapter 35, paragraph 1) A rapture that is before the great tribulation, but after the Antichrist has appeared, would qualify as a mid trib rapture, in modern terminology.
Ice's mentor, Dallas Sem. president John Walvoord, couldn't find anyone holding to pretrib before 1830 - and Walvoord called John Darby and his Brethren followers "the early pretribulationists" (RQ, pp. 160-62). Ice belittles Walvoord and claims that several pre-1830 persons, including "Pseudo-Ephraem" and a "Rev. Morgan Edwards," taught a pretrib rapture. Even though the first one viewed Antichrist's arrival as the only "imminent" event, Ice (and Grant Jeffrey) audaciously claim he expected an "imminent" pretrib rapture!
While the writer of the pseudo-Ephraem sermon, whoever he was, used a Greek word that has been translated “imminent,” He did not use it in the sense of an event that would come without warning. Toward the end of section 1 of this sermon, he said, “When the Roman empire begins to be consumed by the sword, the coming of the Evil One is at hand. It is necessary that the world come to an end at the completion of the Roman empire. In those days two brothers will come to the Roman empire who will rule with one mind; but because one will surpass the other, there will be a schism between them. And so the Adversary will be loosed and will stir up hatred between the Persian and Roman empires. In those days many will rise up against Rome; the Jewish people will be her adversaries.” Then He opened section 2 of the sermon by saying, “We ought to understand thoroughly therefore, my brothers, what is imminent or overhanging. Already there have been hunger and plagues, violent movements of nations and signs, which have been predicted by the Lord, they have already been fulfilled (consummated), and there is not other which remains, except the advent of the wicked one in the completion of the Roman kingdom.”
When these two comments are compared, it is exceedingly clear that this writer was most absolutely not saying that the Antichrist’s arrival was “imminent” in the sense of suddenly coming without warning. But then he went on, saying, “Why therefore are we occupied with worldly business, and why is our mind held fixed on the lusts of the world or on the anxieties of the ages? Why therefore do we not reject every care of worldly business, and why is our mind held fixed on the lusts of the world or on the anxieties of the ages? Why therefore do we not reject every care of earthly actions and prepare ourselves for the meeting of the Lord Christ, so that he may draw us from the confusion, which overwhelms all the world? Believe you me, dearest brother, because the coming (advent) of the Lord is nigh, believe you me, because the end of the world is at hand, believe me, because it is the very last time. Or do you not believe unless you see with your eyes? See to it that this sentence be not fulfilled among you of the prophet who declares: ‘Woe to those who desire to see the day of the Lord!’ For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins.”
So, although this unknown writer said that the coming of Antichrist was “imminent,’ he very clearly said that something else would take place before that time. And that something else was “all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins.”
Thus we see that the only dishonesty revealed here is the false accusation being made against Ice and Grant Jeffery.
And Ice (and John Bray) have covered up Edwards' historicism which made a pretrib rapture impossible! Google historian Dave MacPherson's "Deceiving and Being Deceived" for documentation on these and similar historical distortions.
Dave MacPherson thoroughly discredited himself with the false accusation he made in his first famous book, titled “The Incredible Cover-Up.” In this book, which was thoroughly researched and documented, he claimed that Darby actually visited the church of Margaret MacDonald, and covered it up. When I read this deceptive book, I said, “he wasted an entire book to prove what I could have proved in five minutes!” For 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, which had been written by a Mr. Newton. 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. Darby wrote:
“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.)
I call MacPherson’s version of events “dishonest,” instead of “mistaken,” because, considering the amount of research he put into this project, I consider it incomprehensible that he did not know about this article, which was openly published.
MacPherson’s “Deceiving and Being Deceived” follows the pattern set in “The Incredible Cover-Up.” He ignores the actual statements of the pre-trib writers in question, in some cases pretending that they did not mean what they actually said, and then deceptively presents information that he imagines renders it impossible that these writers meant what they actually said.
As an example, he quotes section 10 of the Pseudp-Ephraem sermon as proof that this writer actually put the rapture at the time when “the Lord shall appear with great power.” But that section actually said, “And when the three and a half years have been completed, the time of the Antichrist, through which he will have seduced the world, after the resurrection of the two prophets, in the hour which the world does not know, and on the day which the enemy of son of perdition does not know, will come the sign of the Son of Man, and coming forward the Lord shall appear with great power and much majesty, with the sign of the wood of salvation going before him, and also even with all the powers of the heavens with the whole chorus of the saints, with those who bear the sign of the holy cross upon their shoulders, as the angelic trumpet precedes him, which shall sound and declare: Arise, O sleeping ones, arise, meet Christ, because his hour of judgment has come! Then Christ shall come and the enemy shall be thrown into confusion, and the Lord shall destroy him by the spirit of his mouth.”
If this is carefully examined, it indeed said that at that time it will be declared, “Arise, O sleeping ones, arise, meet Christ.” But there is no hint of the living being “gathered” and “taken to the Lord,” as it had said in section 2. Nor did it say that this resurrection would be the resurrection of the righteous. It actually intimated the opposite, although it did actually say it, for what it said was, “Arise, O sleeping ones, arise, meet Christ, because his hour of judgment has come!” “The hour of judgment” sounds like a resurrection of the wicked, not of the righteous.
But where did the writer of this sermon have “the saints” at this time? He had them coming with Christ, for he said, “on the day which the enemy of son of perdition does not know, will come the sign of the Son of Man, and coming forward the Lord shall appear with great power and much majesty, with the sign of the wood of salvation going before him, and also even with all the powers of the heavens with the whole chorus of the saints.” So the very section which Macpherson claims proves a post trib rapture, has “the saints” coming with Christ, not being “gathered,” at that time, as he had previously explicitly said would happen “prior to the tribulation” in section 2.
The remainder of this very worthless article is mostly a series of accusations bordering on libel, and that have zero bearing on the question of the timing of the rapture.
