Archive

Archive for the ‘End Times’ Category

New study shows myth of global warming

September 19, 2017 Leave a comment

Bill Wilson

Former Senator and failed presidential candidate Al Gore has written books about the world coming to an end because of climate change. Democratic Party politicians have schemed ways to tax us all to change the weather. Celebrities and the immediate past “president” have ridiculed “deniers” of global warming. The science community has censored fellow scientists who have challenged the concept. Fact is, the scientists at England’s University of East Anglia’s Climate Research Unit (CRU), the official source of climate change data, fabricated the data. Now British scientists have released a new study saying that because the modeling was wrong, global warming isn’t the threat it once was thought.

Largely ignored by Gore, politicians, celebrities and the news media, UK Telegraph Environmentalist reporter James Delingpole in 2008 blew the whistle on scientists after he obtained 1,079 emails and 72 documents from the CRU. He wrote in 2009 that scientists were practicing “Conspiracy, collusion in exaggerating warming data, possibly illegal destruction of embarrassing information, organized resistance to disclosure, manipulation of data, private admissions of flaws in their public claims and much more.” Also in 2008, Nobel Prize winner for physics Ivar Giaever said, “I am a skeptic. . . Global warming has become a new religion.”

Now the UK Telegraph reports “Climate change poses less of an immediate threat to the planet than previously thought because scientists got their modeling wrong, a new study has found. New research by British scientists reveals the world is being polluted and warming up less quickly than 10 year old forecasts predicted, giving countries more time to get a grip on their carbon output.” The Telegraph says experts are now predicting that there is a 66% chance of keeping global temperatures within 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels because temperatures are far cooler than thought in comparison to data from the mid-1800s. They also say the possible US pull-out of the UN climate accord will not make much difference. So, for now, the polar ice caps will not be melting and causing earth-destroying floods as once predicted.

Genesis 1:28 defines man’s role in the environment, “And God blessed them, and God said unto them, be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion . . . over every living thing that moves upon the earth.”  And after the great flood of Noah’s time, God promised in Genesis 8:22, “While the earth remains, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.” Jesus said in Matthew 24:4, “Take heed that no man deceive you.” Only God the Creator has power to destroy earth. Man is its steward. We should not be deceived by men who are using fear of the earth’s destruction to create a new religion, a new social order.

Have a Blessed and Powerful Day!

Bill Wilson

www.dailyjot.com

 

 

Advertisements

5 Theologians on the Child of Revelation 12

September 8, 2017 Leave a comment

 

August 30, 2017

Last weekend one of my favorite pastors implied that “Every conservative theologian that’s worth reading…” interprets Revelation 12 in a way contrary to how those of us following the sign do. Among other things this pastor was quite adamant that Revelation 12 is simply talking about the birth and ascension of Jesus Christ, and has nothing to do with the rapture of the Church.  In his words this view is “longtime held, conservative, orthodox eschatology.”

Well, I would like to address that statement…

Wait….who cares what I have to say?  How about we let some longtime, conservative, orthodox, eschatology teachers address the subject!  And when I say longtime, well, you’ll see what I mean…

  1. John Nelson Darby (1855)

“If the mighty man, the mystic man, the man-child of Revelation xii. is to act [in judging the world with a rod of iron], He must first be complete (of course He is so, essentially so, in Himself, but as Head over all things to the Church which is His body). The head and the body must be united before He can act as having this title before the world; because the mystic man as a whole cannot take it until the Church is taken up to Him. For not until then—until the Church, the body, is united to the Head, Christ, in heaven—is the mystic man in that sense complete; and therefore, the Church must be taken up before Christ can come in judgment. ”

And this…

“In the chapter we have read, you have first Christ Himself and the church, figured in the man-child; and then in the woman who flees from persecution for 1260 days you have the Jewish remnant, those who are spared in the time of judgment but are not yet brought into glory.”

And this…

“I have no doubt that the “man child” spoken of in the chapter that we have been reading includes the church as well as Christ. But it is Christ that is principally meant, for the church would be nothing without Christ; it would be a body without a head. It is Christ who has been caught up; but the church is included, for whenever He begins to act publicly, even as regards Satan being cast down, He must have His body, His bride, with Him; He must have His brethren, His joint-heirs.”

Reference: John Nelson Darby, Seven Lectures on the Prophetical Addresses to the Seven Churches (3d rev. ed.; London: G. Morrish, c. 1855)

  1. William Kelly (1870)

“On this principle then I cannot but consider that the rapture of the man-child to God and His throne involves the rapture of the church in itself. The explanation why it is thus introduced here depends on the truth that Christ and the church are one, and have a common destiny. Inasmuch as He went up to heaven, so also the church is to be caught up.”

Reference: William Kelly, Lectures Introductory to the Study of the Acts, the Catholic Epistles, and the Revelation (London: W. H. Broom, 1870)

  1. Richard Chester (1882)

“Now if the male Man-child of Rev. xii. is to be regarded as solely representing the Lord Jesus Christ ascended into the heavens, as some interpreters affirm; or as representing the visible Christian Church exalted into political power, as taught by others, it were not easy to establish any parallelism, or any correspondence whatsoever between Zech. iii. and Rev. xii. But if the Man-child represents, as is the belief of many students of prophecy, the entire body of “the dead in Christ” raised, and the living in Christ who shall be changed, and both together caught up to meet Him in the air—or if, as I have suggested in the article above referred to—he is to be rather regarded as a portion of the Jewish people—of “the remnant according to the election of grace” incorporated by conversion to Christ into the Church of this dispensation—and thus “brought forth”—“born again,”—and then, “caught up to God and to His throne,” in the rapture of the risen and living saints of 1 Thess. iv.—then, in either of these cases, I submit that this vision of Zechariah iii. corresponds most accurately.”

Richard Chester, “Old Testament Light on New Testament Prophecy,” The Prophetic News and Israel’s Watchman (December, 1882)

She gave birth to a male child, one who is to rule all the nations with a rod of iron, but her child was caught up to God and to his throne,
Revelation 12:5

  1. Harry Ironside (1919)

“I have read or carefully examined several hundred books purporting to expound the Revelation. I have learned to look upon this twelfth chapter as the crucial test in regard to the correct prophetic outline. If the interpreters are wrong as to the woman and the man-child, it necessarily follows that they will be wrong as to many things connected with them.”

And this…

“If we allow Scripture itself to answer, we find there is a person and a company of people answering to this description. In the 2d Psalm Jehovah says to Messiah, “Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten Thee. Ask of Me, and I shall give Thee the nations for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession. Thou shalt break them with a rod of iron; Thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter’s vessel” (vers. 7–9). This, clearly enough, is our Lord Jesus Christ, who is soon to reign over all the earth, and undoubtedly He is primarily the Man-child who is to rule the nations with a rod of iron, and the special object of Satan’s malignity. But we have already seen, in Rev. 2:26–28, that when He reigns He will not reign alone. . . . Is there then any incongruity in understanding the man-child to represent both Christ Jesus our Lord and His church? Surely not, for He is the Head of the body, the church, which is the fullness, or completion of Himself, so that the title, “The Church” is applied to both head and body viewed as one in 1 Cor. 12:12. . . . We may then, on the authority of Scripture itself, safely affirm that the man-child represents the one New Man who is to rule the nations with a rod of iron—Christ, the Head, and the church, His body. If this be so, then it is impossible that the woman should symbolize the church.”

And this…

“We have seen that the man-child symbolizes both Head and body—the complete Christ. Therefore, as in other prophecies, the entire present dispensation is passed over in silence, and the church is represented in its Head, caught up with Christ. For immediately after this, Satan, again acting through the Roman Empire which is to be revived in the last days, turns upon the woman Israel and seeks to vent his wrath and indignation against her.”

Reference: Harry A. Ironside, Lectures on the Revelation (New York: Loizeaux Brothers, 1919)

Quotes 1-4 were compiled by Dr Michael Svigel, a Department Chair and Associate Professor at Dallas Theological Seminary.  You can read more context surrounding those quotes (and many more which weren’t included) here:
Proof of the Rapture in Revelation 12

UPDATE: Unsealed.org just put up an amazing post listing 15 Conservative Scholars who agreed that the Male Child of Rev 12:5 Represented The Church. Be sure out that expanded list out as well!!

Here is the link:
http://www.unsealed.org/2017/08/conservative-scholars-agree-male-child.html

  1. Chuck Missler (approx. 2005) / G. H. Pember (1884)

We need one guy who is still living, don’t we?   One of the greatest teachers of our lifetime, Chuck Missler, says the following about Rev 12:5…  He references a fairly famous book written in the 1800’s by G.H. Pember:

“I always USED TO view that as the ascension of Our Lord.  But there is a guy by the name of Pember who wrote a book about Genesis, Earth’s Earliest Ages.  And it BLEW ME AWAY because he see’s this differently and I don’t know that he’s wrong.  He see’s… that child… as the Body of Christ.  He see’s in that The Rapture.   Isn’t that wild?  And it doesn’t alter the text because what happens from verse 6 on is Tribulational.”

Listen to the quote for yourself here: (58 seconds)

Source: https://rev12daily.blogspot.com/2017/08/5-theologians-on-child-of-revelation-12.html

The Rapture and Revelation an overview of 1 and 2 Thessalonians

 
Dr. Ted Horton, Director of PMI Center for Biblical Studies – Arab
(PhD Graduate of PMI Center for Biblical Studies and Calvary Christian College and Seminary)

We can find the Apostle Paul discussing the pre-tribulation rapture or the Second Coming of Christ (and by context alluding to the pre-tribulation rapture) in every verse of 1st and 2nd Thessalonians. Paul was encouraging the church in the first epistle with the Blessed Hope. In the second letter we find that the church in Thessalonica had been led to believe that they had missed the Day of Christ, NOT the Day of the Lord as many new versions translate 2 Thessalonians 2:2. Even going back to the Greek we see that the word is “Christos,” so it is properly translated Christ. But I am getting ahead of myself. The Bible of course would be the King James Bible.

 

1 Thessalonians

 

CHAPTER 1-1Th 1:9 For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God; 10 And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come. – Here we see a picture of the PTR as we are waiting on Christ to return for us. We have been delivered by our salvation from eternal wrath and the church that will be present when it is time for Daniel’s 70th Week to commence will be delivered from that wrath.

 

CHAPTER 2- 1Th 2:19 For what is our hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing? Are not even ye in the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ at his coming? – When the Lord returns bodily to the earth, the church will be coming WITH Him. We will be with Him because He took us up in the PTR.

 

CHAPTER 3- 1Th 3:13 To the end he may stablish your hearts unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints.—Again, when the Lord returns He will come WITH ALL His saints. This is because He will have already gathered them.

 

CHAPTER 4- 1Th 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. 15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 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. – This shouldn’t require much commentary. The Lord is personally returning for His saints. This MUST be PTR as during the Second Coming the saints are all with Him.

 

CHAPTER 5- All of chapter 5 should be read, but here are some highlights:

1Th 5:1 But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. 2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.—Notice here Paul says Day of the Lord. This is much different from the Day of Christ that will be used in 2 Thessalonians. The Day of the Lord is dealing with The Time of Jacob’s Trouble and the Millennial Kingdom and is much longer than a 24 hour day. The Day of Christ is the Rapture and happens in an instant. Terms that relate to the Day of the Lord that you will see often are night, thief, darkness, overtaken, wrath, etc. The church has words associated with it such as light and day; the church is never used in conjunction with wrath, night, or thief.

 

1Th 5:5 Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. – Study the pronouns of Chapter 5. You will see they, they, they and then all of a sudden, ye. Paul is distinguishing between the two groups; between the world and the church.

 

1Th 5:7 For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night. 8 But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation.—Here it is again: they, sleep, night. Then we see the word but. But is a subordinate conjunction and when we see it we know that we are about to read something of a different tone or scope than what came before it. They (the world, the lost, unbelieving Israel) sleep in the night BUT us (believers, the church) are of the day!

 

1Th 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, 10 Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him. 11 Wherefore comfort yourselves together, and edify one another, even as also ye do.—God has not appointed US (who is us again? The church!) to wrath. We will live with Him. We are to take comfort in that. The comfort, by context is the Blessed Hope, the PTR!

 

1Th 5:23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.—These believers will have been long dead in body when Christ returns, and they will be with Him and we know that they will rise first from what we read earlier. So that again demands a PTR for them to get new bodies that they may be WITH Him at His coming.

 

2 Thessalonians

 

CHAPTER 1- 2Th 1:7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,– We will be at rest with the Lord when it is time for Him to return because the saints will have been taken up. We are with Him so that we can return with Him.

 

CHAPTER 2- 2Th 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,– Chapter 2 gives a good timeline of the Tribulationon and you will notice that before it ever begins the Lord comes for us and we are gathered together unto Him.

 

CHAPTER 3- 2Th 3:5 And the Lord direct your hearts into the love of God, and into the patient waiting for Christ.—The Church has been waiting for His imminent return for 2,000 years. With proper exegesis of Daniel, Revelation, the Olivet Discourse, and the Pauline Epistles we can see that this 7 year period is for Israel and that the church will be removed sometime before it begins.

Rapture loathing Dave MacPherson didn’t tell the REAL story

Dave MacPherson’s the Rapture plot: weighed and found wanting by Frank Marotta

Since the early 1970’s, Dave MacPherson has aggressively attacked the pretribulation rapture by attributing its origin to Margaret Macdonald, whom MacPherson considers to be occult influenced. He claims J.N. Darby derived the pretribulation rapture from her and this was done secretly, lest the true origin of the rapture be discovered. MacPherson develops this idea in his books The Incredible Cover-Up and The Great Rapture Hoax. It has been successfully demolished in works by R. A. Huebner, Thomas Ice, and Gerald Stanton,1 to name a few.

MacPherson’s Seventh VersionMacPherson’s latest book is The Rapture Plot. It claims to reveal “. . . the most astounding historical revisionism of the past century” (p. 138). The plot is that brethren scholar William Kelly used his periodical The Bible Treasury to conceal that J.N. Darby took the pretribulation rapture from the Irvingites. This was accomplished by alleged misrepresentations of Irvingite prophetic views in Kelly’s 1889-1890 articles on the Catholic Apostolic Church. In these same articles Kelly is alleged to have created a smoke screen by emphasizing Irvingite heterodoxy. Then in 1903 (13 years later), having discredited the Irvingites, Kelly was able to credit Mr. Darby with pretribulationism in his article, “The Rapture of the Saints, Who Suggested It, or rather on what Scripture?” This “plot” is considerably more dull than his Margaret Macdonald material and is equally lacking in any substance. That an orthodox Christian such as William Kelly should write articles exposing a contemporary heterodox sect should surprise us no more than a Christian periodical of today printing articles exposing Mormonism. Nor is it shocking that an ardent pretribulationist as Kelly would defend the history and doctrine of the rapture. We fail to see any plot at all.

In our research on Catholic Apostolic and Irvingite works, we have never found a claim that anyone outside their group “stole” their doctrines. Consider the Catholic Apostolic apologist William Bramley-Moore, a contemporary of William Kelly. In his work The Church’s Forgotten Hope, (asignificant work never discussed by MacPherson) Bramley-Moore skips over Margaret Macdonald and credits John Asgill in 1703 as “. . . the only individual who, since the Reformation [until 1830] had given a clarion testimony” to the hope of translation (p. 251)! We will not manufacture a “plot” or “cover-up” regarding the failure of MacPherson and others to credit Asgill. (Asgill taught that individual translation was possible, similar to Enoch or Elijah. His view is distinct from pretribulationism.) More relevant to our discussion, Bramley-Moore never claimed the brethren or anyone else “stole” the Irvingite prophetical views.

Recently, the most extensive critical analysis ever produced on Irvingite doctrine declared that they were still primarily historicist, while Darby and the Brethren had become futurist. Further, Columba G. Flegg notes that the Brethren teaching on the rapture and the present invisible and spiritual nature of the church,

were in sharp contrast to Catholic Apostolic teaching, . . . There were thus very significant differences between the two eschatologies, and attempts to see any direct influence of one upon the other seem unlikely to succeed-they had a number of common roots, but are much more notable for their points of disagreement. Several writers [referring specifically to MacPherson] have attempted to trace Darby’s secret rapture theory to a prophetic statement associated with Irving, but their arguments do not stand up to serious criticism.2

Historical DeficienciesMacPherson professes to be a historian (p. 233). His work is lacking in historical method. Consider his claim that William Kelly, as editor of Darby’s Collected Writings, manipulated them. Regarding Darby’s Notes on Revelation (1839) MacPherson writes:

We’ve previously noted that a chart (listing no artist or date) accompanying this work shows the church in heaven no later than Revelation 4 -additional manipulation and further contradiction of Darby’s Revelation 12 basis! (p. 152)

I have inspected a xeroxed copy of the 1839 edition of this work published by Central Tract Depot, London. The chart in question is there and shows the church in heaven in Revelation chapter 4! MacPherson’s speculation is without foundation. A true historian would inspect the original source materials before making the claims that MacPherson does. He is governed by an agenda, not a desire for unbiased historical research.

Here are a few of the many deficiencies that I found in The Rapture Plot:

1. MacPherson states that the key symbol of the pretribulation rapture for Margaret Macdonald is the catching up of the two witnesses of Revelation 11 (p. 47-49). If this is true, one wonders if MacPherson has ever read Revelation 11. Before the witnesses are caught up (verse 12), the beast makes war with them and kills them (verse 7). Thus the two witnesses go through tribulation before they are killed, raised and caught up. So if Macdonald’s teaching is based on this passage, she is certainly posttribulational! Actually, there is no doubt that the woman who said, “The trial of the Church is from Antichrist” was posttribulational.

Morgan Edwards and the Rapture2. Recently it has come to light that the 18th century Baptist Morgan Edwards held to a pretribulation rapture (see Pre-Trib Perspectives Sept/Oct 1995). If MacPherson were to regard Morgan Edwards as pretribulational, then both his Macdonald “cover-up” and his Kelly “plot” would be for naught. In The Rapture Plot he recklessly labels Edwards a posttribulational historicist. He writes: “. . . it’s obvious that Edwards interpreted these 1260 days [of Revelation 11] as years” (p. 266). This is a blatant falsehood. Edwards wrote in his Two Academical Exercises:

When these witnesses will appear is hard to say; for though their time of prophesying in saccloth [sic] is 1260 days or three years and a half (allowing thirty days to a month) yet they may preach out of sackcloth long before; for the 1260 days refer only to the time that the holy city and the outer court of the temple shall be trodden under the foot of the Gentiles (or Antichrist and his army) viz. 42 months, which make exactly 1260 d

ays, allowing 30 to a month (Rev xi.2). . .” (p. 19)

It is clear from the above that Edwards does not believe the two witnesses had appeared yet. The preaching in sackcloth are 1260 literal days; if they were years (clearly they are not from the context) then they had not as yet begun, which is unlike historicism in any form. The “prophesying out of sackcloth” that Edwards speculates the two witnesses will perform is before Revelation 11:2. Edwards is futurist and literal in his consideration of prophetic time in Revelation 12:7-11 (p. 8), Daniel 8:14 (p. 20), Daniel 12:12,13 (p. 21), Revelation 12:14 (p. 23), and Daniel 12:11 (p. 23).

3. MacPherson writes on p. 267 of The Rapture Plot:

Edwards’ basis for holding to a rapture three and a half years before the second advent (and a future millennium) may well have been the Revelation 11 witnesses on whom he focused. This chapter has a period of three and a half days (verses 9, 11) that historicism can view as three and a half years. Since the spirits of these dead witnesses conceivably go to be with Christ during the same days, days preceding the final advent-historicist Edwards could see in this symbol a rapture three and a half years before the same advent.

Compare this with Morgan Edwards:

Another event previous to the Millennium will be the appearing of the son of man in the clouds, coming to raise the dead saints and change the living, and to catch them up to himself, and then withdrawing with them, as observed before. This event will come to pass when Antichrist be arrived at Jerusalem in his conquest of the world; and about three years and a half before his killing the witnesses and assumption of godhead. (Edwards, p. 21)

MacPherson’s speculation is without foundation; Edwards distinguishes the saints caught up from the two witnesses, both as to time (the saints caught up three years and a half before the witnesses killed) and identity. Edwards identifies the witnesses as Elijah and the Apostle John (Edwards, pp. 17-19); MacPherson fails to inform his readers of this fact. The catching up of the witnesses is after the three and a half days (verse 12), not before. MacPherson also fails to inform his readers of Morgan Edwards linking the rapture to I Peter 4:17, “For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God” (Edwards, p. 7)

4. MacPherson concludes his section on Morgan Edwards by writing:

Edwards’ scheme of a rapture three and a half years before the end of a 1260-year tribulation has the same tiny gap a futurist would have if he were to teach a rapture three and a half days before the end of a 1260-day tribulation! Since such a futurist view would be seen as a posttrib view, Edwards (who had the same small percentage) should be classified as a historicist posttrib! p268)

There is a footnote attached which states:

Edwards saw a rapture at the extreme end of the tribulation. The mathematics works out as follows: 3.5 years/1260 years = 0.0027 or 0.27% remaining. That means 99.73% of the tribulation was already past before the rapture. Hardly a pretrib rapture! (p. 268)

As already shown, Edwards did not teach anything like a 1260 year tribulation. Nor was he a historicist. Nor was he “posttrib.” But let us apply the same mathematics to some of his alleged pretribulationists. First, consider John Hooper, a contributor to The Morning Watch. MacPherson speaks of “Hooper’s pretrib rapture” (p. 200). He also writes of Hooper as “a historicist who saw the final advent in about 1868, Hooper had 37 remaining years where he could fit in between Revelation 16 and Revelation 19…” (p. 200). Let us perform a calculation: 37 years/1260 years = 0.0294 or 2.94% remaining. That means at least 97.06% of the tribulation was already past before the rapture (assuming Christ could come immediately). Hardly a pretribulational rapture! Perhaps Dave MacPherson will tell us at what number between 97.06% and 99.73% complete we transition from pretribulational to posttribulational. Or perhaps MacPherson could admit Hooper as posttribulational. Next, let us consider the woman whom MacPherson labels as the first pretribulationist: Margaret Macdonald. He wrote on p. 49 of The Great Rapture Hoax:

Margaret, however, had

been influenced by historicism and the year-day theory involving 1260 years. . . If only one-tenth of 1260 years remained unfulfilled in her view, she could still believe in a future Antichrist; he would have a total of 126 years in which to do his dirty work.

MacPherson is gracious in allowing 126 years remaining in Margaret’s mind. Especially since she identified Robert Owen, a contemporary, as the Antichrist (The Rapture Plot, p. 53). But applying the same mathematical formula that would mean 90% of the tribulation was complete for her! Applying the same method MacPherson does to Morgan Edwards would make her “hardly pretrib!”

5. The importance MacPherson places on The Rapture Plot reveals his spiritual condition. He writes on p. 234:

The real test is ahead. If pretrib promoters ignore or twist this book’s documentation, and if their only bottom line is a continuing flow of funds, then I won’t be surprised if God views them collectively as an “Achan” (Josh. 7) and allows a national or even international money collapse!

This statement is incredible. Ignoring The Rapture Plot leads to an international money collapse! This extreme notion indicates the mentality under which MacPherson operates.

It is significant that MacPherson is the lone “historian” who has argued a connection between Macdonald and Darby. Considering that there have been numerous historical examinations of both the Irvingites and the Brethren, yet MacPherson stands alone in exposing the “plot,” is rather a testimony to polemical bias, not the facts. Those anti-pretribulationists who have adopted MacPherson’s revision have done so merely on the basis of his word, not as a result of original research.

ConclusionDave MacPherson’s The Rapture Plot is a defective work which distorts history. There is no plot. It misrepresents godly men such as Darby and Kelly. It fails to prove the Irvingites were pretribulational in the 1830s. It is completely inaccurate concerning Morgan Edwards’ teaching. The Rapture Plot has the same character as MacPherson’s previous works. Christians who desire to feed their souls on truth would be well advised to avoid his works. W

Endnotes1R.A. Huebner, The Truth of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture Recovered (Millington, NJ: Present Truth Publishers, 1976). Huebner, Precious Truths Revived and Defended Through J.N. Darby, Vol. 1 (Morganville, NJ: Present Truth Publishers, 1991). Thomas Ice, “Why the Doctrine of the Pretribulational Rapture Did Not Begin with Margaret Macdonald,” Bibliotheca Sacra (Vol. 147; April-June 1990), pp. 155-68. Gerald Stanton, Kept From The Hour, 4th. edition, (Miami Springs, FL: Schoettle Publishing, 1991).

2Columba Graham Flegg, ‘Gathered Under Apostles’ A Study of the Catholic Apostolic Church (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992), p. 436.


Return to Pre-Trib Index

The Rapture and Revelation an overview of 1 and 2 Thessalonians

The Rapture and Revelation
an overview of 1 and 2 Thessalonians

Dr. Ted Horton
(Graduate of PMI Center and Calvary Christian schools)

We can find the Apostle Paul discussing the pre-tribulation rapture or the Second Coming of Christ (and by context alluding to the pre-tribulation rapture) in every verse of 1st and 2nd Thessalonians. Paul was encouraging the church in the first epistle with the Blessed Hope. In the second letter we find that the church in Thessalonica had been led to believe that they had missed the Day of Christ, NOT the Day of the Lord as many new versions translate 2 Thessalonians 2:2. Even going back to the Greek we see that the word is “Christos,” so it is properly translated Christ. But I am getting ahead of myself. The Bible of course would be the King James Bible.

1 Thessalonians

CHAPTER 1-1Th 1:9 For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God; 10 And to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead, even Jesus, which delivered us from the wrath to come. – Here we see a picture of the PTR as we are waiting on Christ to return for us. We have been delivered by our salvation from eternal wrath and the church that will be present when it is time for Daniel’s 70th Week to commence will be delivered from that wrath.

CHAPTER 2- 1Th 2:19 For what is our hope, or joy, or crown of rejoicing? Are not even ye in the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ at his coming? – When the Lord returns bodily to the earth, the church will be coming WITH Him. We will be with Him because He took us up in the PTR.

CHAPTER 3- 1Th 3:13 To the end he may stablish your hearts unblameable in holiness before God, even our Father, at the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ with all his saints.—Again, when the Lord returns He will come WITH ALL His saints. This is because He will have already gathered them.

CHAPTER 4- 1Th 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. 15 For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. 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. – This shouldn’t require much commentary. The Lord is personally returning for His saints. This MUST be PTR as during the Second Coming the saints are all with Him.

CHAPTER 5- All of chapter 5 should be read, but here are some highlights:
1Th 5:1 But of the times and the seasons, brethren, ye have no need that I write unto you. 2 For yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night.—Notice here Paul says Day of the Lord. This is much different from the Day of Christ that will be used in 2 Thessalonians. The Day of the Lord is dealing with The Time of Jacob’s Trouble and the Millennial Kingdom and is much longer than a 24 hour day. The Day of Christ is the Rapture and happens in an instant. Terms that relate to the Day of the Lord that you will see often are night, thief, darkness, overtaken, wrath, etc. The church has words associated with it such as light and day; the church is never used in conjunction with wrath, night, or thief.

1Th 5:5 Ye are all the children of light, and the children of the day: we are not of the night, nor of darkness. – Study the pronouns of Chapter 5. You will see they, they, they and then all of a sudden, ye. Paul is distinguishing between the two groups; between the world and the church.

1Th 5:7 For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night. 8 But let us, who are of the day, be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love; and for an helmet, the hope of salvation.—Here it is again: they, sleep, night. Then we see the word but. But is a subordinate conjunction and when we see it we know that we are about to read something of a different tone or scope than what came before it. They (the world, the lost, unbelieving Israel) sleep in the night BUT us (believers, the church) are of the day!

1Th 5:9 For God hath not appointed us to wrath, but to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ, 10 Who died for us, that, whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with him. 11 Wherefore comfort yourselves together, and edify one another, even as also ye do.—God has not appointed US (who is us again? The church!) to wrath. We will live with Him. We are to take comfort in that. The comfort, by context is the Blessed Hope, the PTR!

1Th 5:23 And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.—These believers will have been long dead in body when Christ returns, and they will be with Him and we know that they will rise first from what we read earlier. So that again demands a PTR for them to get new bodies that they may be WITH Him at His coming.

2 Thessalonians

CHAPTER 1- 2Th 1:7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,– We will be at rest with the Lord when it is time for Him to return because the saints will have been taken up. We are with Him so that we can return with Him.

CHAPTER 2- 2Th 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,– Chapter 2 gives a good timeline of the Tribulationon and you will notice that before it ever begins the Lord comes for us and we are gathered together unto Him.

CHAPTER 3- 2Th 3:5 And the Lord direct your hearts into the love of God, and into the patient waiting for Christ.—The Church has been waiting for His imminent return for 2,000 years. With proper exegesis of Daniel, Revelation, the Olivet Discourse, and the Pauline Epistles we can see that this 7 year period is for Israel and that the church will be removed sometime before it begins.

Fake News about the Rapture

Dr. Mike Johnston

Mark Twain observed, “It’s easier to deceive people than it is to convince them they have been deceived.” Never has this been truer than it is today.

Deception made its debut 6000 years ago when Satan used it as a ploy to seduce Adam and Eve away from God’s Word (Gen. 2:15-17; 3:1-6). Today the devil’s patent trickery has become the international delusion Jesus, Paul, and Peter warned that it would:

“Take heed that no man deceive you” (Matt. 24:4). “But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived” (2 Timothy 3:13). “But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction. And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of” (2 Peter 2:1-2).

I believe we are approaching the apex of these prophecies. Serving as evidence, are hypocritical media[1] liberals invoking their First Amendment rights to promote a perverse Leviticus 18 agenda while litigating against the free speech rights of patriots exposing them.

Blowing the whistle on media mendacity, Charlie Daniel’s warned, “The news is not about news anymore. It’s about protecting some people, destroying others and shoving a socialist agenda down the collective throats of America.” What America’s fiddle man described is a sneaky tactic called fake news that was unmasked and named during 2016 Presidential election.

It gained steam in 1925 when Adolph Hitler released Mein Kampf. The con which was later perfected by Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels involves telling a lie so “colossal” that no one would ever conceive of a person possessing “the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.” [2] I think Rush Limbaugh had this in mind when he stated, “The truthfulness of an accusation is not nearly as important as the seriousness of the charge.”

This is precisely the strategy employed in 1973 with the release of an incendiary paperback purporting the following unfounded but colossal allegation:

“The PreTrib Rapture is a Giant
Hoax that didn’t exist until 1830”

There are several things required for defamation of this magnitude to deceive anyone. First, it requires an element of truth to twist, which it does. Second, it requires numbers of people possessing marginal knowledge of the truth twisted, which there are. Third, there must be an unapologetic truth twister who refuses to relent even when faced with conflicting evidences will grit his teeth and carry the lie all the way from conception to deception; and we have one. In this case, that man’s name is Dave MacPherson.[3]

MacPherson is a mean spirited [4] rapture-loathing book peddler renegade who portrays himself as an “investigative reporter” stumbling on a cover up regarding the PreTrib rapture. The truth is, he nothing more than an architectural academic connecting a few dots he created.

Now let me hasten to say at the outset, I’m not opposed to anyone having an opposing opinion about the rapture; all of us are entitled to make our own assumptions. What irks me is the deceitful manner in which MacPherson lays claim to journalistic integrity while inventing facts to substantiate conclusions he can’t prove in any other way. Where I come from, that isn’t scholarship, that’s scandal. After much research, my assessment of MacPherson is in line with the following scholars review of “The Rapture Plot”: “Blinded by his rush to a preordained conclusion, his analysis of those sources is clouded by a hateful style which prevents much of what he says from being taken seriously.” [5]

In the end, astute readers will find it ironic if not hilarious that all MacPherson’s drum-thumping about a vast rapture cover up is eclipsed by discovering he has personally presided over a cover up hiding the fact he has no evidence to prove it.

Dave’s Incredible Cover-Up

MacPherson’s chicanery has existed in manuscript form over four decades. The fact is while DM is expressly livid with proponents of PreTrib rapture, he neither does scholarship nor himself any favors by misrepresenting history. His Houdini like specialty is illusion whereby he makes fiction appear to be factual with the stroke of a keyboard and the hope his “evidence” draws no scrutiny which most of the time in the sphere of rapture antagonism, proves to be true.[6]

My initial exposure to his material occurred a few years after I came to Christ. [7] I’ve since studied his scheme with more intensity. My research reveals that preparation for his ruse began in 1953 with what he calls “a jolting encounter with the rapture”. [8] From that, Dave presents himself as an innocent victim of mean PreTrib rapture people. This includes his expulsion from BIOLA College for arguing the merits of the Post Trib rapture in a PreTrib school. [9] Entering at this juncture are escalating signs of clinical paranoia as he begins to blame every evil in his life [10] on the rapture and its teachers, including but not limited to, a drunken binge in Mexico, a tragic car accident, his mom’s death, his sister’s inability to have more children, the demonic possession of his dog Wolf, and all his father’s pastoral woes. [11] Believe it or not, Dave goes so far as to blame hundreds of thousands of deaths in Communist China to the rapture.

Armed with acrimony – and a Goebbels-like determination to eliminate rapture teachers – his mission statement has ostensibly centered on the wholesale destruction of the “blessed hope” – aka rapture (Titus 2:13) – along with the good reputations of every person on earth promoting it. This he began in 1973 by publishing what is essentially the same document with cosmetic changes which has now become a multi-volume fantasy franchise using incendiary titles like “The Rapture Plot”, “The Incredible Cover Up”, “The Great Rapture Hoax”, “Unbelievable Pre-Trib Origin”, “Late Great Pre-Trib Rapture”; et al.

MacPherson’s shtick in every book – beaten like a jungle drum, but never proven – is that the rapture is a pervasive fraud with an elaborate cover up hiding a dubious origin he pretends [12] didn’t exist until 1830. [13] That, he alleges, was the year a demon-possessed charismatic member of Edward Irving’s[14] Catholic Apostolic Church by the name of Margaret MacDonald [15]  conjured it up in a vision; recorded and published later by her apostolic husband Robert Norton then stolen by a Plymouth Brethren scholar we’ll discuss in a moment, John Nelson Darby.

Now bear in mind, there are two published versions of Miss MacDonald’s vision; both provided by her husband. [16] The second one was glommed onto by MacPherson because it was redacted slightly making it more palatable to MacPherson’s mythos. What follows, is excerpted from the first record of the alleged utterance.

“I saw the people of God in an awfully dangerous situation. Now will the wicked one be revealed with all power…It will be a fiery trial…Nothing but what is of God will stand…I said, Now shall the awful sight of a false Christ be seen on this earth; and nothing but Christ in US can detect this awful attempt of the enemy to deceive…This is the trial through which those are to pass, who will be counted worthy to stand before the Son of Man…The trial of the Church is from Antichrist … Oh be filled with the Spirit – have the light of God within you, that you may DETECT Satan…” This was the unedited first recording of Miss MacDonald’s vision published in 1840. Note that she warned the church about contending with Antichrist NOT escaping from him in a PreTrib rapture. What you may not know is her vision was a slightly redacted in another version [17]that appeared twenty-one years later. This redacted version is the one DM seized upon in order to arrive at his crafty conclusion. [18]

Let’s think logically here. If Darby stole an original idea from Margaret MacDonald or anyone else for that matter, why is everyone except MacPherson and his gang silent about it? No one – including himself, Robert Cameron [19] or Samuel Tregelles [A] (possibly the man Dave “borrowed” the germ for his idea from), nor any of their cronies – has ever provided a shred of credible proof demonstrating Darby or Scofield stole the rapture from under Miss MacDonald’s nose.

Now we see a problem. In order to sell his books, MacPherson must convince his customers – without substantive proof – he has new evidence Darby stole the PreTrib rapture from Miss MacDonald (who remained silent about it) – rather than getting it from the Bible three years earlier as Darby and extant records maintains. Therefore, since historical documentation won’t support MacPherson invented invectives, he simply plays Houdini by convincing his audience that he is right and the historical records are wrong.

But there are many inconvenient records disproving Dave’s allegations. Does he admit his cover up, or conceive of and carry out the character assassination of the main witnesses against him.

Being who he is, Dave opts for the latter option.

There is a frightening resemblance between Dave’s determination to hang a rapture origin cover up on Plymouth Brethren[20] scholar John Nelson Darby [21]  and Joseph Stalin’s secret police chief Lavrentiy Beria who bragged, “Show me the man and I’ll find you the crime”.

Devoid of any compassion, conviction, or constraint, MacPherson’s wages all-out war on Darby  by framing him as a compromising theological thug who jettisoned his integrity to pilfer and plagiarize MacDonald’s demonic vision [22] – then share it with CI Scofield – another deceased nemesis he excoriates – to use in his reference Bible.[23] All of this rumored by MacPherson to be part of an arcane scheme Darby, Scofield[24] and ultimately the Plymouth Brethren apparently cooked up in some dank, dimly lit room for no earthly reason other than the indescribable joy they all shared knowing they were deceiving innocent Christian people.

What you’ve read is what research reveals. It’s out there and you can find it very easily. Personally, by the time I got to this point in my investigation, I’d completely changed my mind about MacPherson’s credibility. The evidence speaks for itself that his work amounts to nothing more than unscrupulous historical revisionism; and I’m not alone in believing that.

Plymouth Brethren scholar Roy A. Huebner, another victim of the MacPherson hate syndicate, accused DM of what amounts to sloppy scholarship for “Using slander that J. N. Darby took the (truth of the) pretribulation rapture from those very opposing, demon-inspired utterances.”  Huebner proves that MacPherson essentially had confused the statements of a number of people in a rush to go to print without solid research confirmation (concluding) … There is much the reader is not aware of and the writings of dozens of theologians would take more time than we can take here to refute the writings of journalist Dave MacPherson. [25] (parenthesis added)

Evidence against MacPherson’s supposition is heavy. While you are certainly free to believe his unsubstantiated appeals, you are joining others who do so simply on the merits of MacPherson’s urging. Godly scholars from every rapture position have studied and refuted his rogue ruminations about Darby and MacDonald for instance simply by comparing actual history with the unsubstantiated claims he continues to retail.

Commenting on MacPherson’s unverified link between Darby and MacDonald or her charismatic connections, PreTrib opponent Ernest R. Sandeen declares, “This seems to be a groundless and pernicious charge. Neither Irving nor any member of the Albury group advocated any doctrine resembling the secret rapture. . . . Since the clear intention of this charge is to discredit the doctrine by attributing its origin to fanaticism rather than Scripture, there seems little ground for giving it any credence.”[26]

After years of research, PreTrib opponent John Bray came face to face with the truth regarding the unverifiable accusations against John Darby’s alleged association with a charismatic occultist, and offered this, “[John Darby] rejected those practices, and he already had his new view of the Lord coming FOR THE SAINTS (as contrasted to the later coming to the earth) which he had believed since 1827. It was the coupling of this “70th week of Daniel” prophecy and its futuristic interpretation, with the teaching of the “secret rapture,” that gave to us the completed “Pre-Tribulation Secret Rapture” teaching as it has now been taught for many years. . . . (and) makes it impossible for me to believe that Darby got his Pre-Tribulation Rapture teaching from Margaret MacDonald’s vision in 1830. He was already a believer in it since 1827, as he plainly said.”[27]

German author Max S. Weremchuk has produced a comprehensive biography on Darby entitled John Nelson Darby: A Biography. “Having read MacPherson’s book . . .” says Weremchuk, “I find it impossible to make a just comparison between what Miss MacDonald ‘prophesied’ and what Darby taught. It appears that the wish was the father of the idea.”[28]

Another staunch researcher Pastor Billy Crone arrived at the same conclusion after traveling abroad trying to uncover any truth that Darby pilfered the rapture as alleged by MacPherson. He also affirmed there is NONE to be found. [29]

A highly suspicious Plymouth Brethren researcher Frank Marotta put it in perspective I think, “It is significant that Dave MacPherson is the lone ‘historian’ who has argued a connection between MacDonald and Darby. Considering that there have been numerous historical examinations of both the Irvingites and the Brethren, and DM stands alone in exposing the “plot,” is rather a testimony to polemical bias, not the facts. Those anti-pretribulationists who have adopted DM’s revision have done so merely on the basis of his word, not as a result of original research.” [30]

Even Hank Hanegraff agrees with the testimonial evidence: “According to Darby himself, however, his dispensational doctrines originated neither from an ecstatic utterance in Edward Irving’s congregation nor from the vision of a Scottish lassie named Margaret MacDonald. Rather, they evolved from the hypothesis that Scripture is replete with two distinct stories concerning two distinct people for whom God has two distinct plans.”[31]

So where did Darby get his rapture theology? Plymouth Brethren F.F. Bruce – no friend of the PreTrib position – I believe is very close to exact truth by stating it was “in the air in the 1820s and 1830s among eager students of unfulfilled prophecy; (therefore) direct dependence by Darby on Margaret Macdonald is unlikely.” (F. F. Bruce, Review of The “Unbelievable Pre-Trib Origin” in The Evangelical Quarterly, (January – March 1975), p. 58). [32]

I’ll quote two other reliable researchers with impeccable credentials who dug up, digested, and dismantled most of the wild misrepresentations about the PreTrib rapture and its proponents MacPherson has ever made.

In Kept from the Hour, Dr. Gerald Stanton makes this observation:

“It will immediately be apparent that his book titles are provocative, if not abusive. There has been no “cover-up” or “hoax,” for Pretrib authors and leaders have arrived at their conclusion from Biblical exegesis rather than from any presumed history of the doctrine, and most certainly with no desire to defraud. Furthermore, to attack the morality and integrity of fellow believers just to further an eschatological opinion is a disgrace to the Name and cause of Christ.”

Another observation of MacPherson’s distortions comes from the late Dr. John Walvoord[33],

“The whole controversy as aroused by Dave MacPherson’s claims has so little supporting evidence … one wonders how he can write his book with a straight face. Pretribulationists should be indebted to Dave MacPherson for exposing the facts, namely, that there is no proof that MacDonald … originated the pretribulation rapture teaching.” [34]

The bottom line is that Dave MacPherson’s anti-PreTrib rapture enterprise comes from the pen of an angry man, blinded by rage, and incapable of fairness with facts inconvenient to his conclusions. The result is the shadowy sham he created, consisting of a bevy of books, teaching the same thing, yet all of them collectively proving nothing except there’s a market in the church for conspiracy theories delivered with high levels of emotion even though non evidential.

Consider with me this writer’s final observation:

“Macpherson’s thesis has been rejected by many competent scholars who are not pre-trib. Men like F.F. Bruce, John Bray, Timothy Weber, and others have found his conclusions untenable. MacPherson misleads his reader by mentioning F. F. Bruce as a good friend of his without letting the reader know that Bruce, a Brethren scholar who rejected pre-trib, totally discarded the rapture plot idea (p. 40). The fact of the matter is that the real test of whether the pre-trib rapture is correct doctrine is not its historical origin but its exegetical support from the Bible. MacPherson’s book provides no help in this area.”[35]

Men of God MacPherson Mocks and Maligns

In the final analysis, Dave MacPherson’s scholarship consists of nothing more than hate filled attacks from assumptions underwritten by a daisy chain of vastly unknown bibliographical references all underwriting him and his dubious sources. What’s equally troubling is his rowdy refusal to be civil by insisting everyone disagreeing with him is by default in league with Lucifer. Nastiness notwithstanding, here’s a small list of unimpeachable Biblical scholars MacPherson by default consigns to heresy if not to Hell purely and simply for disagreeing with his crass, clumsy conclusions.

Isaac Watts, JN Darby, CI Scofield, John Gill, Morgan Edwards, DL Moody, RA Torrey, Clarence Larkin, Lewis Sperry Chafer. William R. Newell, J. Vernon McGee, David Jeremiah, Lehman Strauss, Merrill Unger, Dave Reagan, Sir Robert Anderson. Charles Swindoll, Jerry Falwell, Jack Hyles, John Walvoord, Charles Ryrie, Dave Hunt, Noah Hutchings, J. Dwight Pentecost, Zola Levitt, J. Randall Price, Dave Breese, Jimmy DeYoung, AC Gaebelein, MR DeHaan, JR Church, HA Ironside, Gary Stearman, Tommy Ice, Hal Lindsey, Ed Hindson, Grant Jeffrey, Chuck Missler, Jack Van Impe, and many more. [36]

The following links provide a partial list of rapture information from Biblical scholars who have themselves thoroughly researched and refuted most every misrepresentation, misquote,  and misapplication MacPherson has made over the past 40 years of attacks against the “blessed hope”.

  • Church, JR (deceased) Founder of Prophecy in the News

https://prophecyinthenews.com/articles/pretribulation-rapture-taught-by-early-church/

  • Ice, Dr. Thomas: Director of the PreTrib Research Center

http://www.pre-trib.org/articles/view/myths-of-origin-pretribulationism-part-1

http://www.pre-trib.org/articles/view/rapture-myths

  • Examining a PreTrib Rapture Statement

http://www.grantjeffrey.com/article/examining_an_ancient.htm

  • Marotta, Frank: Brethren scholar

http://www.according2prophecy.org/macphers.html

  • Missler, Dr. Chuck: Byzantine Text Discovery: Ephraem The Syrian

http://www.khouse.org/articles/1995/39/

  • Reagan, Dr. David: Director of Lamb & Lion Ministries

http://christinprophecy.org/articles/in-defense-of-the-pre-tribulation-rapture/

https://www.raptureforums.com/rapture/origin-pre-tribulational-rapture/

  • Strandberg, Todd: Director of Rapture Ready

http://www.raptureready.com/faq-did-dave-macpherson-invent-the-false-history-of-the-pr-trib-rapture/

  • Stunt, Timothy CF: Brethren scholar

http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=415

  • Wilkinson, Dr. Paul: Brethren scholar

http://www.pre-trib.org/articles/view/left-behind-or-led-astrayexposed-long-version

 

NOTES

[1] The media admits over 90% of them support Democrats in elections. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/05/06/just-7-percent-of-journalists-are-republicans-thats-far-less-than-even-a-decade-ago/?utm_term=.b8704f1259f3

[2] Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, vol. I, Chapter 10. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_lie

[3] Be sure to study Brethren scholar Timothy Stunt’s extensive expose on the underhanded tactics MacPherson employed to arrive at his conclusions: http://brethrenhistory.org/qwicsitePro/php/docsview.php?docid=415

[4] This brief bio is a response in kind to MacPherson’s relentless mean spirited attacks against good men and women simply for disagreeing with him.

[5] Source: http://our-hope.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/ReviewMacPherson.pdf

[6] BTW, this isn’t this called LYING? Check the records yourself if you still refuse to believe me.

[7] I was saved April 24, 1975 at seven thirty in the morning.

[8] DM claims to have had a jolting encounter with the Rapture in 1953. (Rapture Hoax p. 3)

[9] He learned this tactic from his father who was himself a recent convert to the Post Trib rapture ruse.

[10] My friend, if this doesn’t qualify for insanity, let’s at least call it “intellectual insolvency”.

[11] http://www.raptureready.com/faq-did-dave-macpherson-invent-the-false-history-of-the-pr-trib-rapture/

[12] MacPherson offers what he swears is proof, but since he is the only person that has stumbled onto the sources, scholars have concluded his “findings” are NOT to be trusted.

[13] Dave lied. The invention of the internet allows us to explore archives of writings from the early church fathers discussing the coming of Christ to remove His church.

[14] Edward Irving was a Scottish clergyman, generally regarded as the main figure behind the foundation of the Catholic Apostolic Church which believed in modern day apostles and sign gifts. In other words they were charismatics. [THE TRIBULATION OF CONTROVERSY: A REVIEW ARTICLE Timothy C. F. Stunt]

[15] Margaret MacDonald was born in 1815 in Port Glasgow, Scotland and died around 1840.[1] She lived with her two older brothers, James and George, both of whom ran a shipping business.[1] Beginning in 1826 and through 1829, a few preachers in Scotland emphasized that the world’s problems could only be addressed through an outbreak of supernatural gifts from the Holy Spirit.[2] In response, Isabella and Mary Campbell of the parish of Rosneath manifested charismatic experiences such as speaking in tongues. Around 1830, miraculous healings were reported through James Campbell, first of his sister Margaret MacDonald and then of Mary Campbell (through James’s letter to Mary).[3] Shortly thereafter, James and George MacDonald manifested the speaking and interpretations of tongues, and soon others followed suit in prayer meetings. These charismatic experiences garnered major national attention. Many came to see and investigate these events. Some, such as Edward Irving and Henry Drummond, regarded these events as genuine displays from the Holy Spirit. Others, including John Nelson Darby and Benjamin Wills Newton, whom the Plymouth Brethren sent on their behalf to investigate, came to the conclusion that these displays were demonic. (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_MacDonald_(visionary)

[16] “It is only with some difficulty that one can identify what MacPherson calls her ‘pretribulationist’ teaching in the transcript of 1840, and when in 1861 Norton quoted from her prophecy he omitted the passage which referred to ‘the fiery trial’ which ‘will be for the purging and purifying of the real members of the body of Jesus’—a passage which clearly assumes that Christians will go through the tribulation.” [THE TRIBULATION OF CONTROVERSY: A REVIEW ARTICLE Timothy C. F. Stunt]

[17] This editing was performed by her husband who wanted to give her credit for a PreTrib vision.

[18] The first account which was a full account of MacDonald’s utterance was published in 1840 in Robert Norton’s Memoirs (pp. 171–76). The second account appeared 1861 with some words removed in The Restoration of Apostles and Prophets pp. 15–18. In order to further the anti-PreTrib rapture scheme, these two accounts were conflated by MacPherson in his book The Incredible Cover-up (p. 151–54)

making it appear to reach a conclusion context would not allow].

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_MacDonald_(visionary)

[19] American Robert Cameron in 1922 wrote a book against pretribulationism that centered his attack against the doctrine of imminence.[2] Early in his book he penned a chapter that ask: “Could Christ Have Come At Any Moment?”[3] Throughout Cameron’s lengthy chapter[4] be cites what he believes are items that would have to take place before any return by Christ, thus nullifying, in his mind, the any-moment doctrine of imminency as advocated by pretribulationists. Cameron believes that imminency “is opposed to the whole of the New Testament.”[5] Source: http://www.pre-trib.org/articles/view/imminence-and-rapture-part-1

[20] Pastor Darby is known as the father of modern dispensationalism. MacPherson’s hatred for dispensationalism (calling it a heresy) stems from his refusal to rightly divide the Word and allow Israel her rightful place in God’s overall economy. His writings are inexorably anti-Semitic.

[21] In his commentary on Revelation, William R. Newell called Darby the greatest interpreter of the Bible since Paul – http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/proph/newelltr.pdf. A collection of Darby’s writings are available at Plymouth Brethren archives: http://www.plymouthbrethren.org/byauthor/5/john_nelson_darby

[22] Researcher Billy Crone traveled to Europe including Scotland where he discovered Darby no doubt heard about MacDonald’s 1830 charismatic manifestation, but considered them demonic and not of God. It also appears in the book by Wilkinson, Paul Richard (2007). For Zion’s Sake: Christian Zionism and the Role of John Nelson Darby. Paternoster. pp. 192–93.

[23] If Darby laid claim to MacDonald’s vision – which incidentally was partial mid trib and post trib, why didn’t Scofield give him credit?

[24] MacPherson loathes both Darby and Scofield. For a clear report on the life of Scofield, may I suggest Dr. Robert Sumner’s piece: http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/dispen/canfield.pdf

[25] Source: http://www.fivedoves.com/letters/mar2015/pastorbob329-2.htm

[26] Source: http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1101&context=sor_fac_pubs

[27] John Bray, The Origin of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture Teaching, pp. 24-25, 28

[28] Max S. Weremchuk, John Nelson Darby: A Biography (Neptune, N. J.: Loizeaux Brothers, 1992). P242. Source: http://www.pre-trib.org/data/pdf/Ice-Part2-MythsoftheOrig.pdf

[29] Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JOWX5EZfgBk

[30] Quoted from: http://www.according2prophecy.org/macphers.html. There is a wealth of info unveiling the mocking MacPherson.

[31] I disagree with Hanegraaff on some important doctrinal issues such as Covenantal Theology. With that caveat, I offer this for consideration from his perspective. Hank Hanegraaff,. Apocalypse Code. (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2007), 46.

[32] http://www.raptureready.com/faq-did-dave-macpherson-invent-the-false-history-of-the-pr-trib-rapture/

[33] Respected theologian and former President of Dallas Theological Seminary.

[34] More information available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret: MacDonald: (visionary)

[35] Analysis of The Rapture Plot: http://our-hope.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/ReviewMacPherson.pdf

[36] Once again, if you buy MacPherson’s narrative, you have to believe as he does that he’s the chosen and enlightened one and EVERY ONE else including this list of renowned PreTrib Bible scholars are half baked malevolent morons deceiving the church with the devil’s lie.

Appendix [A]
Excursus on Tregelles

Tregelles (in 1864) made the claim that the pre-trib teaching arose from an utterance in Irving’s church:

“But when the theory of a secret coming of Christ was first brought forward (about the year 1832), it was adopted with eagerness…I am not aware that there was any definite teaching that there would be a secret rapture of the church at a secret coming, until this was given forth as an ‘utterance’ in Mr. Irving’s church, from what was there received as being the voice of the Spirit. But whether any one ever asserted such a thing or not, it was from that supposed revelation that the modern doctrine and the modern phraseology respecting it arose.” (Tregelles, “The Hope of Christ’s Second Coming,” 1864)

Tregelles does not document this “utterance.” G.H. Lang therefore writes:

“No evidence is available that any of the Powerscourt circle took the idea of a secret rapture from the Irvingite utterances, no evidence beyond Tregelles’s assertion, and for this he gives no proofs.” (“The Disciple,” 1954)

In “The Unbelievable Pre-Trib Origin,” (1973), Dave MacPherson does his best to make his own far-fetched idea “believable.” He attempts to link the origin of the pre-trib rapture view with a young lady named Margaret McDonald. However, he fails considerably in offering any evidence that this young lady influenced anyone on ANY Biblical subject (other than perhaps, whether or not Apostolic gifts were reviving). To start with, she was in Scotland (not England, where Irving’s church was located). As to M. McDonald’s particular “revelation,” she appears to teach that the “Spirit-filled” will be “kept” from deception in the MIDST of the Trib (i.e. the post-trib view)! She has the faithful (including herself) on earth when the Antichrist is revealed:

“I saw the people of God in an awfully dangerous situation. Now will the wicked one be revealed with all power…It will be a fiery trial…Nothing but what is of God will stand…I said, Now shall the awful sight of a false Christ be seen on this earth; and nothing but Christ in US can DETECT this awful attempt of the enemy to deceive…This is the trial THROUGH which those are to pass, who will be counted worthy to stand before the Son of Man…The trial of the Church is from Antichrist. It is by being filled with the Spirit that we shall be kept. I frequently said, Oh be filled with the Spirit – have the light of God within you, that you may DETECT satan…” (emphasis mine)

It is obvious that by being “kept,” McDonald means Christians are kept from DECEPTION while the Antichrist is manifested!

McPherson erred by stumbling onto a book written by Robert Norton in 1861 which claimed that Margaret McDonald originated the pre-trib rapture view. The book was titled, “The Restoration of Apostles and Prophets in the Catholic Apostolic Church” (i.e. Irving’s movement). In 1852, Norton wrote “Reasons for Believing the Lord has Restored to the Church Apostles and Prophets.” By 1861, the pre-trib rapture view was a well-established doctrine among premillennialists. Isn’t it reasonable to conclude that Norton (a member of the Catholic Apostolic Church) would greatly desire to argue that something “significant” originated from someone exercising a restored “Apostolic” gift? Notice his words in describing Margaret McDonald’s supposed “revelation” of the pre-trib rapture (i.e. two-stage coming):

“Marvelous light was shed upon Scripture, and especially upon the doctrine of the Second Advent BY THE REVIVED SPIRIT OF PROPHECY. In the following account by Miss M.M…we see first the distinction between the final stage of the Lord’s coming…and His prior appearing…” (emphasis mine; MacPherson, p.47)

Sadly, Norton (1807-1883) was simply a victim of his own wishful thinking. He read into M.M.’s “revelation” in order to argue that “marvelous light” (i.e. the pre-trib rapture teaching which was WIDESPREAD among prophecy students at the time) had come forth from his own restoration movement. Why would he need this type of prop? Because the majority of Christians at the time thought his movement was inspired by the Devil and that Norton himself was “fanatical”! How advantageous it would be to argue that the prized teaching in regard to the two stages of the Lord’s Coming was first manifested by someone with a supernatural gift. Yet, he failed in offering anything other than his own assertions to validate his claims. MacPherson repeated the mistake (for different reasons). –Pastor Joey Faust; Source: http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Believer%27s%20Corner/Doctrines/rapture_history.htm

 

Not a single Bible verse indisputably placing Body of Christ on earth during Israel’s Tribulation

Dr. Mike Johnston

There isn’t a verse anywhere in the Bible clearly and indisputably placing the church Body of Christ on earth for a single moment during Israel’s coming Tribulation without pulling from context and redefining the words “saints”, “elect”, and “disciples” which in Daniel, the Olivet Discourse, and Revelation refer to Israel. The evidence for this leaps from the pages of the King James Bible rightly divided (2 Tim. 2:15).

%d bloggers like this: