Archive

Archive for the ‘Fundamentalism’ Category

THE SCOFIELD BIBLE and C. I. SCOFIELD

September 2, 2017 Leave a comment

By Glenn R. Goss, Th. D.

Professor of Bible Philadelphia College of Bible

 

The year 1909 (almost 90 years ago!) was quite a year. Louis Bleroit of France piloted a small monoplane across the English Channel; homesteaders began to arrive in Montana; the NAACP was founded; Al Capp, creator of Li’l Abner, was born; Einstein became a leading scientific thinker in Europe; Grand Prairie, Texas, was incorporated; the first Siberian huskies were introduced to Alaska; George Sargent won the U. S. Open in Golf; Pittsburgh beat Detroit 4-3 to take the World Series; and, of great importance but little noted, Oxford University Press published The Scofield Reference Bible. It was released to the public in January, 1909, and revised by Scofield and his team of consultants as the New and Improved Edition in 1917. Now, almost 90 years later, the 1917 edition is still being printed by Oxford University Press, and the 1967 edition, the Scofield Study Bible (the title today) is offered in four versions: the King James, the New International Version, the New American Standard Bible, and the New King James Version. The first million copies were printed by 1930. Since then the number published has escalated, and so has the diversity in versions and languages. The Scofield is now printed in at least seven languages other than English.

 

But who is C. I. Scofield? Many know there is a Scofield Memorial Church in Dallas. What is the connection between the church and Scofield himself? How did the Scofield Reference Bible come to be? And why is the Scofield Study Bible so loved by some and so disliked by others?

 

Cyrus Ingerson Scofield was born in Michigan in 1843. When the Civil war began, he was in Tennessee with his sisters. While there, he enlisted in the Confederate army. Military records show he fought in the Confederate Army for over a year in 1861-1862, then was discharged by reason of not being a citizen of the Confederate States, but an alien friend. Scofield told his biographer Charles Trumbull that he served through the war, and that he was awarded the Confederate Cross of Honor. After the war, Scofield located in St. Louis, married, and had a family of two daughters and a son. His wife was from a French Catholic family, and she and her daughters remained in that church till their deaths. His son died as a young boy. He joined a law firm, read and studied to be admitted to the bar. In 1869 he and his family moved to Kansas, where he was admitted to the bar to practice law. He was elected twice to the Kansas legislature, in 1871 and in 1872. President Grant appointed him as the United States District Attorney of Kansas June 9, 1873. He affirmed, in the oath of office, that he had never voluntarily born arms against the United States . . . He evidently had no problem with that claim, even though he had fought in the Confederate Army. He resigned December 20, 1873, amid charges and counter-charges of political corruption. That ended Scofield’s political career.

 

Scofield probably moved his family back to St. Louis, for his son Guy died in December, 1874, and was buried in St. Louis. But by 1879 his life had deteriorated to the extent that he drank heavily and was involved in several questionable court cases. For most of this time, his wife and daughters were back to Atchison, Kansas. Mrs. Scofield filed for divorce in 1881, but that case was dismissed. A second filing of the case resulted in a divorce decree in 1883. These and other legal actions involving Scofield, and several notations in city directories, provide some of the only evidence about him during the time from 1873 to 1879.

 

A published account of Scofield’s life in can be found in The Life Story of C. I. Scofield by Charles Gallaudet Trumbull, published by Oxford University Press in 1920. An unpublished Master Thesis, “A Biographical Sketch of C. I. Scofield” was written by William A. BeVier at Southern Methodist University in 1960. Both of these are complimentary of Scofield. Joseph M. Canfield wrote and published, The Incredible Scofield in 1988. This book is very critical of Scofield’s theology and personal life. Due to the lack of existing records, and the lack of information in records that do exist, both BeVier and Canfield make much use of terms such as “it seems,” “probably,” and “evidently.” Trumbull, on the other hand, writes factually, since much of his information came directly from Scofield himself. But even Trumbull passes over the period of 1873 to 1879 with nothing more than a reference to Scofield’s habit of drinking. Though not much is certain about this period, one thing is clear. A change was needed in Scofield’s life. Both Canfield and BeVier agree with Trumbull that a conversion did take place. Canfield questions if it was real, at least at first, and he does not agree on the time. But all recognized that Scofield needed a change in his life. And, God had prepared a man to meet that need.

 

Enter Thomas McPheeters, a Christian businessman who knew and served the Lord. He bluntly asked Scofield one day in September, 1879, why he was not a Christian. The following discussion brought conviction, repentance, and a change of heart. Scofield was born again! He began to learn about, live for, and serve his new-found Lord. He lost his desire for alcohol completely. Also, he spent much time with Dr. James H. Brooks, a prominent pastor and Bible teacher in St. Louis. He served the YMCA and was licensed to preach by the Congregational churches of St. Louis.

 

In 1882 Scofield was asked to move to Dallas, Texas, and take charge of a struggling Congregational mission church there. After some time, he consented, and arrived in Dallas Saturday, August 19. He preached the next day to eleven people who came. That evening two of them accepted Scofield’s invitation to believe in Christ as Savior. He began cottage prayer meetings, led the church to adopt a constitution and bylaws, and was called as the full time pastor and ordained in 1883. He married Miss Hettie Hall Wartz in 1884, and the church sent Miss Eva Smith, its first missionary, to India in 1885. The only child of this union, Noel Paul, was born December 22, 1888. In 1889 a new building was begun at Bryan and Harwood, to seat 600. A mission church later called Grand Avenue Congregational church, was begun in South Dallas in 1890. Scofield started the Central American Mission (now CAM International) that same year. Church membership was noted as 355 in 1892, 550 in 1894, and 812 in 1896.

 

In 1896 Scofield accepted a call to pastor the Trinitarian Congregational Church in Northfield, Massachusetts, D. W. Moody’s home church. He remained there until 1903 when he returned to Dallas hoping for more free time to work on the Reference Bible. He spent nearly a year in Switzerland in research, but was back in Dallas in 1905. Scofield acted as an absent pastor, and continued his research with another trip to Europe. In 1908, the church withdrew from the Lone Star Congregational Association, and in 1909, following his resignation as pastor, Scofield was appointed Pastor Emeritus. The church name was changed in 1923, two years after Scofield’s death, when the congregation approved a change of name to Scofield Memorial Church.

 

The Reference Bible was not his first work. Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth was published in 1888. In 1890 came the Scofield Correspondence Course, which later was turned over to Moody Bible Institute in 1914. As of 1998, over 100,000 students have been enrolled in that program.

 

The Reference Bible plans came to light in 1901 at a summer Bible conference in which Scofield and A. C. Gaebelein were ministering. Scofield told Gaebelein his plans, but noted that financial backing was the main drawback. The next year at the conference Gaebelein sought and gained sufficient support for Scofield to move ahead with the work, and Scofield returned to his pastorate in Dallas with the desire to begin the work. The Reference Bible could not be too bulky, but it had to include the tools to Bible study along with a clear summary of the Bible so that it would meet the need of someone who was just beginning to read the Bible. He determined to find and state exactly what the Bible itself had to say and not to add philosophical or theological definitions. This would provide a wider acceptance and usage.

 

Scofield traced key subjects and teachings through the Bible with chain references. Each Bible book was to have a simple, clear introduction. Paragraph headings were introduced, at the suggestion of Dr. R. A. Torrey. From his experience in teaching the Bible in both oral and written form, he desired to include helps where readers might have questions, though constantly refusing to allow the notes to become commentary on the text.

 

Scofield and his wife went abroad in 1904 to work on the notes for the Bible. In England he visited his friend Mr. Robert Scott of Morgan and Scott, publishers of religious books. When Scott learned of Scofield’s project, he introduced Scofield to Henry Frowde, the head of Oxford University Press. Preliminary acceptance was soon granted, and the matter of a publisher was settled before the Scofields arrived in Montreaux, Switzerland where they planned to work. Large wide-margin notebooks were prepared, each large page having a page from the Bible pasted in the center. On these pages the Reference Bible took shape. This trip lasted about eleven months, and resulted in the preparation of the introductions and the book analyses.

 

The Scofields went to Oxford, England, after a short visit to the church in Dallas. The time was spent at Oxford University conferring with other scholars and continuing the work on the notes and references. The Scofields came to America again, and went to Michigan to continue the work. Another stay in Montreaux, Switzerland in 1907 brought the work to completion. It was now ready for final review and printing. During the summer of 1908 the Scofields were in New York City, proofreading the printer’s proofs. Publication followed in early 1909.

 

A copy of the 1909 edition is very difficult to find today. Some copies exist, but Oxford no longer has records of how many were originally printed. In recent years the Barbour Company reprinted the 1909 edition, though with some changes and corrections in the notes. It is not, therefore, a true copy of the original. Evangelical Word (Wheaton) also published in 1987 a translation of the 1909 notes in a Russian Bible. Over 400,000 of these have been printed for distribution in Russia.

 

The New and Improved Edition was published in 1917. This edition included dates at the top of the center column, and comments in the book introductions as to the time of events, according to Ussher. A number of corrections and additions were made to the notes and references, and Arabic numbers were used in place of Roman numerals in the cross references. Sale of the Scofield Reference Bible grew, and by 1930 it became the first book published by Oxford University Press to attain the one million mark in sales. Oxford renewed the copyright in 1937 and 1945, and then dropped the description, New and Improved Edition. About 1990 the name was changed to The Scofield Study Bible, and it continues in print today. In their latest Bible catalog, it is called The Old Scofield Study Bible to distinguish it from The New Scofield Study Bible which was published in 1967. The New Testament alone was printed and released in 1920. A number of printings of this edition were released. The 1917 edition of the Scofield Bible was published in Spanish in 1987, a Swahili edition was released in 1993 (NT) and 1994 (whole Bible), and a bi-lingual edition with both the text and the notes in Spanish and English in 1996.

 

After nearly forty years, the New and Improved Edition was ready for revision. In 1954 Oxford University Press chose E. Schuyler English, who had already edited The Pilgrim Bible, a student Bible based on The Scofield Reference Bible, to serve as chair of a revision committee. The committee included William Culbertson, Charles Feinberg, Frank E. Gaebelein, Allan MacRae, Clarence E. Mason, Jr., Alva J. McClain, Wilbur M. Smith, and John F. Walvoord.

 

The revision, called The New Scofield Reference Bible, was published in 1967. The King James Version (KJV) was used for the text, though it included such word changes in the text as will help the reader. Archaic words, words whose meaning had changed, and some pronouns were replaced. Introductions to the books were brought up to date, and over 700 new footnotes and over 15,000 more cross references were added. The new and the revised footnotes held to Scofield’s original plan that these notes should not be commentary on the text, but helps where readers had questions. The name has now been changed to The New Scofield Study Bible.

 

As contemporary versions of the English Bible gained popularity, the Scofield material was adapted to these versions. First came The Oxford NIV Scofield Study Bible (now called The New Scofield Study Bible NIV) in 1984. Three faculty from Philadelphia College of Bible were consultants in the process of adaptation: Clarence E. Mason, Jr. (a member of the Editorial Revision Committee for the 1967 edition), W. Sherrill Babb, President, and Paul S. Karleen, Chair of the Division of General Education.

 

The next adaptation was The New Scofield Study Bible NAS in 1988. Paul S. Karleen and Glenn R. Goss, Professor of Bible at Philadelphia College of Bible, served as consultants. The fourth adaptation was The New Scofield Study Bible NKJV in 1989. Arthur L. Farstad , Executive Editor of the New King James Version, was the consultant. The New Scofield Study Bible has been published in several languages. A French edition was released in 1975 (40,000 were printed), the Portuguese edition in 1986, and an edition of the annotations only in Hungarian in 1993. Two German editions have been published (over 65,000 printed), a new French edition has been released, an Italian edition is in preparation, and a new Spanish edition is in preparation also. Spanish Publications Inc. has prepared a number of these editions. Mrs. Erma Walker (President of Spanish Publications, Inc) and her late husband, William, missionaries with CAM International, began by translating the Scofield materials for the Spanish Bible. They directed the work on the publications in Spanish, Portuguese, French, Russian, and Swahili, and the organization now has requests for the Scofield Bible in over a dozen more languages. One of the requests is for the Scofield in Arabic.

 

After The New Scofield Reference Bible was published in 1967, Oxford released A Companion to The New Scofield Reference Bible by E. Schuyler English in 1972. Paul S. Karleen authored The Handbook to Bible Study with a Guide to the Scofield Study System, published by Oxford in 1987. This latter volume is a complete and very helpful guide to the Scofield Bible, and assists the reader to understand the approach of the Scofield system and the doctrine of the Scofield Bible.

 

In 1967, E. Schulyer English wrote that the sales of the Scofield Bible had topped three million copies. Now, the number hovers near the five million mark with all language editions. That testimony itself demonstrates the appeal, approval, and usefulness of the Scofield Bible. Though Study Bibles are being published now at an astounding rate, between five and fifteen new titles a year in the last decade, the new and the old Scofield Bibles show a consistency in demand. And many have not just one, but several Scofields, for as one wears out, another is purchased to take its place. And why is the Scofield loved? Because no other Bible provides the clarity and consistency of comments that help the reader to understand God’s revelation to humans in the broadest sense, and how that revelation relates to every day Christian life.

 

But not all love Scofield. Some call his teaching heresy, socialist, communist, Zionist, or that which has been the leading cause for the fall of American civilization because it presents, from their point of view, an antinomian view that rejects the moral law of God (as given in the Old Testament) as the standard for living today. Also, some claim that it believes the church is weak, ineffective, and failing because the hope is in the coming of Christ for His own, rather than in a victorious church. Some look at Scofield as a drunkard, liar, adulterer, and perjurer, and note that such a one can produce only that which is evil and heretical. Are these criticisms valid? No, for Scofield was born again after Thomas McPheeters confronted him with the claims of Christ, and he began to grow in Christ. All branches of Christianity can identify persons who, having been regenerated, turned and followed Christ into significant service for the Lord. Also, the ministry of dispensationalists shows a great concern for the world’s peoples and a growing ministry to them. Scofield’s own CAM International has built, strengthened, and provided leaders for the church in Latin America. This is one example among many of certainly believing in, supporting, and building the church in this age (see Mt. 16:18). Further, the charge that dispensationalists are “antinomian,” or against the moral law of God, is in error. In response to the same charge by Dr. John H. Gerstner in his book, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth, John Witmer in his review responds: “Concerning this charge Gerstner concedes, ‘We notice, with relief, that many dispensationalists are better Christians than their theology allows'” (p. 250). This concession helps explain how a theology supposedly so heretical could produce such exemplary Christians as Brookes, Scofield, Gaebelein, Chafer, Pettingill, Trumbull, Ironside, DeHaan, and a host of others including many dispensational leaders living today. In fact the daily Christian living of most dispensationalists is indistinguishable from that of most followers of covenant theology. This clearly raises the question as to whether dispensational theology is as antinomian as Gerstner claims, since he would certainly agree with Jesus’ observation that “the tree is known by its fruit,” (Matt 12:33; cf. 7:15, 20). Indeed, many have been saved through reading the Bible and the Scofield notes. And many have been called to serve Him through reading that Bible. The Scofield Bible stands as a source of help and blessing to untold millions who have read, heard, and profited from it. And that was the goal of Scofield himself, “The completed work is now dedicated to the service amongst men of that Loving and Holy God, whose marvelous grace in Christ it seeks to exalt,” (Introduction, 1909 edition).

Advertisements

Fundamentalists STAND against the avalanche of APOSTASY

No automatic alt text available.

Latter Times News: Avalanche of Apostasy

Dr. Mike Johnston

I am appealing to Fundamentalists to renew our commitment to Christ and the Word of God given us in the King James Bible. Let me explain my challenge here.

It is painfully obvious the world is in a woeful tailspin of wickedness. Notwithstanding, those of us immersed in the Word of God have much to rejoice over because we have seen this coming for many years. The mystery of iniquity predicted by Paul (2 Thess. 2:7) has now ensnared a new breed of post-Christian modernists who have grown up in a culture where rights outweigh righteousness. You find this crassly evident on the three major arenas confronting all of us: the social front where wickedness is represented as a right; the political front that perpetrates godlessness through vile legislative acts; and the religious front that is so self absorbed it ignores either of the other two fronts. 1

From the Garden of Eden we find the first clear teaching that departing from the Word of God has had devastating results- yea, hath God said (Gen. 3:1)? Those who don’t know the Word of God often find themselves ensnared by pernicious preachers espousing devilish doctrines (2 Pet. 2:2). The Lord Jesus Christ can return any moment to snatch out His church from the earth (John 14:2-3; 1 Thess. 4:13-18) thereafter ushering in the 7 year tribulation (aka the time of Jacob’s [Israel’s] trouble- Jer. 30:7) which Daniel referred to as a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time (Dan. 12:1) because it is arguably the worst period in the history of the world. God the Spirit has precisely documented all these end times events in the King James Bible- which unlike the modern translations- is not missing vital passages of Scripture we desperately need in these final hours.

Let’s examine the verses predicting the avalanche of apostasy that can be seen blowing through the church like a foul wind.

DECEPTION: Tolerating deception fostered a disdain for truth

Matthew 24:4-5  And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.  (5)  For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ; and shall deceive many.

Matthew 24:24  For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

Romans 1:18  For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness.

 

2 Thessalonians 2:10-11  (10)  And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.  (11)  And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: (12)  That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

 

1 Timothy 4:1  Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils;

 

2 Timothy 3:13  But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.

 

2 John 1:7  For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist.


FALSE SPIRITUALITY

The liberal, lethargic Laodicean Church is a pathetic representation of the vibrant body of believers willing to die defending the great doctrines of the faith for eighteen centuries. So what happened? If you love the Book of Revelation as much as I do, you know chapter 17 pictures a woman riding the beast that Dave Hunt proved without equivocation was the whore of Romanism. But what we don’t find in Scripture is the precise path the church took to get to that frightful place.

 

Satan is subtle and everything he does is to denigrate Christ and deify himself. Since most Christians don’t read the Bible and yet want to appear spiritual, few are willing to oppose what’s passing itself off in the church today as a new move of God. In light of this, the devil is using false signs and wonders as an opportunity to marry the unholy to the holy. It is through the tenets of the charismatic movement Satan has promoted unity above purity. Flowing from Montanus to Azusa to Branham, and on to the neo-Charismatic renewal of today Satan has successfully merged Christians with catholics, cultists (Mormons, Tommy Tenney-TD Jakes style anti-trinitarians), Copelandites, Latter Rainists, and many others who claim a commonality in charismania. And believe me, if you watch “Christian” television, you’ll see the devil’s plan in action.  Pat Robertson, Benny Hinn, Kenneth Copeland- ad nauseum- all predict events that never come to pass and those who challenge their false prophecies are often excoriated for causing disharmony in the body. Here’s the warnings:

 

False christs (anointed ones), prophets,  and prosperity preachers

Matthew 24:24  For there shall arise false Christs, [1]and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect.

 

2 Peter 2:1-3  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.  (2)  And many shall follow their pernicious ways; by reason of whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.  (3)  And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.

 

False signs and wonders

 

2 Thessalonians 2:9  Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders.

[1] This is a common occurrence in scores of “ministries” as well as on most “Christian” television channels today where charlatan prosperity prophets fill the airwaves claiming special anointing from the Lord Jesus and God’s blessing upon all who will honor them by making them rich. Read 2 John 1:10-11 BEFORE you support them.

 

INFO ON ISMS

 

Dr. Mike Johnston and Dr. Ted Horton, Editors

ADVENTISM- cult teachings of Ellen G. White aka Seventh Day Adventism [1]
AGNOSTICISM- comes from the Latin word ignoramus, meaning “one who is ignorant.” Agnostics deny adequate evidence either proving or disproving the existence of God (Psalm 19:1; Rom. 1:20).
ASCETICISM- denial of pleasure in an attempt to please or pacify God (Matt. 23:4; Col. 2:20-22).
ATHEISM- a denial that there is a God, and a refusal to entertain any proof otherwise; fools (Psalm 14:1).
BRANHAMISM- belief system held by William Branham,  an anti-Semitic mid-20th century anti-Trinitarian Charismatic clairvoyant  who held city-wide “healing” revivals featuring occult practices (divination; kundalini).
NOTE: Charismatics often hail him as a church father.
BUDDHISM- an offshoot of Hinduism that began with the Buddha (enlightened one) around the 5th century BC in India.  Buddhism contains influences from Brahmanism, gods, and goddesses.  This -ism teaches a universal cosmic consciousness that is nonpersonal.  Man creates his own suffering in this life and his fate is determined by Karma and carried out by reincarnation.  Salvation occurs by the works of following Buddha’s teachings, ultimately entering Nirvana, or the place where the self is extinguished in the Void of the cosmic consciousness.
CATHOLICISM- cult Romanist Church including popery, blasphemy, and idolatry (Matt. 23:4-12).[2]
COMMUNISM- atheist totalitarian form of government whereby money and possessions are forcibly gathered and distributed by a government perceived to be the final sovereign authority over mankind.
CREATIONISM- belief system based upon Gen. 1:1: in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
DEISM- originated in England in the early 17th century as a rejection of orthodox Christianity. Deists asserted that reason could find evidence of God in nature and that God had created the world and then left it to operate under the natural laws he had devised (Psalm 14:1; Rom. 1:20).
EPICURIANISM- is a system of hedonist philosophy based upon the teachings of Epicurus (c340-c270 BC), who taught that pleasure is the highest good and ideal in life (Ecc. 2:1-10; Acts 17:8; Rom. 1:18-32).
EXISTENTIALISM- a 19th century philosophy that elevates subjective human experience (emotions, beliefs, etc) above objective (matter, creation, Scripture) for living in and dealing with a hostile and highly indifferent universe.
FASCISM- founded by Italian nationalists during WWI as socioeconomic suppression of any opposition through controlled terror, censorship, racism, and a aggregate policy of belligerence and dictatorial nationalism.
FATALISM- a belief that events are pre-fixed rendering human powerless to change them.
FUNDAMENTALISM (Christian)- strict adherence to specific Christian doctrines typically in opposition to the encroaching theology of Modernism. The term “fundamentalism” was originally coined in the 20th century to describe a specific body of doctrine that ultimately developed into a movement within the US Christian community.
HEDONISM- pleasure is happiness and thus becomes man’s ultimate goal (Rom. 1:18-32).
HUMANISM- an atheistic system whereby man is worshiped as the central focus of the universe and thus becomes the subject of all human enterprise.
JUDAISM- monotheistic religion of the Jews, tracing its origins to Abraham and having its spiritual and ethical principles embodied chiefly in the Hebrew Scriptures and the Talmud- all foundational to New Testament Christianity. Today Jews making aliyah to Israel await the rebuilding of the Temple and the coming of the Messiah to establish His promised 1000 year earthly reign in Jerusalem.
LEGALISM-
LIBERALISM- a paradoxical philosophy claiming tolerance to anything except Christianity. Sadducees were liberals (Matt. 16:6; 22:23; Acts 23:8).
MATERIALISM- acquiring things is the highest good for man; covetousness is idolatry (Col. 3:5; see also Mark 7:22; Rom. 1:29; Eph. 5:3).
MODERNISM- unholy penchant to modernize Christianity by removing and or replacing the ancient landmarks (Psalm 11:3; Prov. 22:28). Antithesis of FUNDAMENTALISM.
MONASTICISM- the works based religious practice of renouncing all worldly pursuits in order to fully devote one’s life to spiritual work.
MONOTHEISM- one who believes there is only one god [Christians, also Jews, Moslems, etc].
MYSTICISM- religious beliefs and practices that go beyond the liturgical and devotional forms of worship of mainstream faith, often by seeking out inner or esoteric meanings of conventional religious doctrine, and by engaging in spiritual practices such as breathing practices, prayer, contemplation and meditation, along with chanting and other activities designed to heighten spiritual awareness. Many facets of mysticism are now endorsed and practiced by Latter Rain leaders and member from the Charismatic movement.
OCCULTISM- Many facets of occulticism are now endorsed and practiced by Latter Rain leaders and Charismatic movement (ie, divination via words of knowledge, tongues, interpretation of tongues; necromancy; levitation; astral projection; bi-locations; slain in the spirit-kundalini; shamanism, and more).
PANTHEISM- god is intrinsically indentified with plants and animals, god is all and all is god (Deut 6:4; 1 John 5:7).
PENTECOSTALISM (includes Charismatics and the Latter Rain Movement)- denomination teaching extra-biblical messages through tongues, dreams, and visions, that places a heavy emphasis on miraculous healings and special “word of knowledge” messages and fosters a prosperity gospel.  The Pentecostal movement ignores biblical instruction and ordains women pastors and preachers, while teaching a works based salvation and denying the eternal security of the believer.
PLATONISM- the true world is actually the invisible world consisting of ideas and thoughts.
PLURALISM- religio-political system seeking the amalgamation of all diverse groups regardless of their belief or lifestyle.
POLYTHEISM- one who believes in many gods which are omnipotent and omniscient.
RELATIVISM- it doesn’t matter what you believe as long as you believe something and you feel its right for you, although it may not be right for someone else it is for you.
ROMANISM- see Catholicism
RUSSELLISM- blasphemous cult teachings of Charles Taze Russell aka as Jehovah’s Witnesses. [3]
SCIENTISM- the belief that science has the answers for our philosophical needs or  social problems.
SECULARISM- the view that religious considerations should be excluded from civil affairs or public education.
SOCIALISM- A system in which the means of producing and distributing goods are owned collectively under the auspices of the government. Forms the base for dictatorial control in Marxist-Leninist theory.
SPIRITICISM- belief in the existence of spirits – non-physical beings that live in the invisible or spirit world – and the ability of communication between these spirits and living people through mediumship. Many facets of spiriticism are now endorsed and practiced by Latter Rain leaders and member from the Charismatic movement.
STOISM- reason is the highest good, people are unaffected by pleasure and pain.
THEISM- is the belief there is a god a creator, both beyond and within the world who can intervene supernaturally. a creator and sustainer who sovereignly controls the world, that all things find their meaning and substance in this being.
[1] For more information, write for our tract: The Damnable Heresies of the Seventh Day Adventists
[2] For more information, write for our tract: Romanism Heresies
[3] For more information, write for our tract: The Damnable Heresies of the Jehovah’s Witnesses

 

 

 

[1] For more information, write for our tract: The Damnable Heresies of the Seventh Day Adventists

[2] For more information, write for our tract: Romanism Heresies

[3] For more information, write for our tract: The Damnable Heresies of the Jehovah’s Witnesses

Categories: Cults, Fundamentalism, Misc

How I Know That The King James Bible Is The Word Of God

by Pastor James Melton

There are many good works that one can read on the authority of the King James Bible, and this particular effort offers nothing really new. However, it does attempt to explain the issue in a simple and brief manner for all to understand. Over the years I have learned a great deal about this issue, and I believe that a truth worth learning is a truth worth telling.

Many preachers and teachers across our land talk about “preferring” and “using” the KJV, but I haven’t heard them speak much about BELIEVING it. Many prefer it and use it, because that’s what their congregations prefer and use, but they do not BELIEVE it to be the infallible words of God. They are taught in college to USE, PREFER, and RECOMMEND the KJV, but they are NOT taught to BELIEVE it. Most “Christian colleges” teach that the King James Bible is only a translation, and that NO translation is infallible. Consequently, the average minister today uses a Book which he doesn’t even believe.

Now, I thank God that I don’t have that problem. I don’t have to play make-believe with anyone about the word of God. I believe it. I believe the King James Bible is the preserved and infallible words of God. It doesn’t merely “contain” the word of God: it IS the word of God. I’m absolutely sure of it, and I’d like to give a few reasons why. Here are twelve reasons how I know that the KJV is the word of God:

God Promised to Preserve His Words

Psalm 12:6-7 says, “The words of the LORD are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.” Then we read in Psalm 100:5 that “. . . . his truth endureth to all generations,” and Jesus said in John 17:17 that God’s WORD is truth.

These words state very clearly that God’s preserved word MUST be available to us today, because God PROMISED to preserve it for us. There MUST be an infallible Book somewhere.

You say, “But ALL translations are God’s word, not just one.” That’s impossible, because the various translations contain different readings, and God is not the author of confusion (I Cor. 14:33). Besides, if all of the versions are the word of God, then where are the “corrupt” and “perverted” versions that we are warned about in II Corinthians 2:17 and Jeremiah 23:36? If everyone is innocent, then where are those who are said to be GUILTY of subtracting from and adding to the word of God (Rev. 22:18-19)? God wouldn’t have warned us about Bible perversion if it wasn’t going to be a reality. According to the scriptures, there must be a single Book that is the word of God, and there must be MANY which are involved in CORRUPTING the word of God.

Now, if the Authorized Version isn’t the infallible word of God, then WHAT IS? There has to be a Book somewhere in “all generations” which is God’s word; so what book is it? Those who “use” the new versions believe that these are good and reliable translations, but they do NOT believe these to be INFALLIBLE translations. However, I know MANY people who believe the King James Bible to be an infallible Book. Why? Because they know that the One True God has ONE TRUE BOOK. He promised to preserve His words, and we believe that He has done just that. Jesus said, “Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away” (Matthew 24:35). If His words didn’t pass away, then where are they? I want to read them. There has to be a perfect volume somewhere. I know the King James Bible is the word of God because God promised to preserve His words.

The Authorized Version Was Translated Under A God-Ordained English King

The main subject of the Bible is the kingdom which God intends to give to His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, Who will be crowned “KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS,” according to Revelation 19:16. Ecclesiastes 8:4 says, “Where the word of a king is, there is power: and who may say unto him, What doest thou?” Unlike the modern versions, the KJV was translated under a king. In fact, the king’s name was “James,” which is the English word for “Jacob,” whom God renamed “Israel,” because he had power with God and with men (Gen. 32:28).

The new versions have been translated in America, which is not a monarchy. God’s form of government is a theocratic monarchy, not a democracy. Therefore, it makes perfect sense that His word would be translated for the English speaking people under a monarchy with an English king. I know the King James Bible is the word of God because it was translated under a king.

Because It Has No Copyright

The original crown copyright of 1611 does not forbid anyone today from reprinting the Authorized Version. It was only copyrighted then for the purpose of allowing the printer to finance the publication. For nearly four hundred years now we have been printing millions of copies of KJV’s without requesting permission from anyone. Over eight-hundred million copies of the Authorized Version have been printed without anyone paying royalties. This cannot be said of any of the new translations.

The new “bibles” are the work of MEN, but the KJV is a divine work of the Holy Spirit. The term “Authorized” has traditionally been applied to the King James Version alone, for this is the one Book which the Holy Spirit has blessed and used for so long. The fact that it bears no copyright allows printing ministries throughout the world to print millions of copies each year for the mission field. I know the King James Bible is the word of God because it has no copyright.

Because God Always Translates Perfectly

The words “translate” and “translated” occur three times in the Bible, and GOD is the Translator each time. The scholars insist that the KJV cannot be infallible, because it is “only a translation.” Do you suppose that such scholars have checked II Samuel 3:10, Colossians 1:13, and Hebrews 11:5 to see what GOD has to say about translating?

In II Samuel 3:10 we are told that it was God Who translated Saul’s kingdom to David. We are told in Colossians 1:13 that Christians have been translated into the kingdom of Jesus Christ, and Hebrews 11:5 tells us that God translated Enoch that he should not see death. God was the One doing the translating each time. What’s the point? The point is that a translation CAN be perfect, if God is involved in the translating.

When the New Testament writers would quote the Old Testament (Mt. 1:23; Mk. 1:2; Lk. 4:4; Jn. 15:25; Acts 1:20; 7:42; I Cor. 2:9; Gal. 3:13, etc.), they had to TRANSLATE from Hebrew to Greek, because the Old Testament was written in Hebrew, but THEY wrote in Greek. So, if a translation cannot be infallible, then EVEN THE NEW TESTAMENT IN THE “ORIGINAL GREEK” ISN’T INFALLIBLE, because it contains translations from the Hebrew text!

Obviously God assisted them in their translating by the leadership of the Holy Spirit, and He assisted the King James translators as well. The scholars will never understand this, for most of them have QUENCHED the Holy Spirit in their own lives by looking to higher education for truth, rather than seeking the Lord’s leadership (Jn. 16:13).

The Holy Spirit Who inspired the word of God through “holy men of God” (II Pet. 1:21) is quite capable of guiding His servants to KEEP the words which Jesus told us to keep (Jn. 14:23). In essence, the KJV translators were merely INSTRUMENTS which God used in translating and preserving His word. In fact, they said this themselves in the Dedicatory to the Authorized Version: “. . . . because we are poor instruments to make God’s holy truth to be yet more and more known to the people. . . “

I know the King James Bible is the word of God, because God is very capable of using anyone He pleases as His very own instruments of righteousness in order to preserve His word.

Because It Produces Good Fruit

The Lord Jesus said that every good tree will bring forth good fruit, and we can know them BY their fruits (Mt. 7:17-20).

God had the KJV translated for the purpose of bringing forth fruit, and it has been very obedient to the call. The greatest preachers of the past four centuries have been King James Bible believers. Billy Sunday is said to have led over one million people to Christ, and he was a KJV believer. Spurgeon, Moody, Whitfield, and Wesley were all KJV men, and the list goes on. God has richly blessed the ministries of such men as these because they stayed busy OBEYING His word rather than questioning its authority.

The KJV produces good fruit. I was led to Christ with a King James Bible. Nearly every Christian I know was led to Christ with a KJV. Why? Because it produces good fruit.

The new translations produce EVIL fruit. The modern perversions of scripture are producing infidels who do not even know what the word of God is, much less where to find it. The new translations produce spiritual babies who are totally incapable of discussing Bible doctrine. The new versions produce NEWER versions, which produce MONEY for the publishers, and I Timothy 6:10 tells us that the love of MONEY is the root of all EVIL.

The Holy Spirit doesn’t bear witness to the modern translations, but He DOES bear witness to the King James. I’ve always believed the KJV to be God’s word, even before I was saved. No one ever told me to believe this, but the Holy Spirit just bore witness to the King James–not the others. After being saved, I spent several years of my Christian life not being aware of the big debate going on these days between King James Bible believers and New Age Version believers. The whole time I believed only ONE BOOK to be God’s word, and even then I was suspicious of the new versions, although no one had told me to be. When I discovered that over eighty percent of the “Christian” schools in our nation do not believe the KJV to be the word of God, I was shocked.

How is it that one comes to believe the KJV naturally, but must be EDUCATED OUT of his belief in it? Why is it that King James believers are accused of following men when GOD is the One Who led them to believe it? Why do opponents of the KJV accuse us of following men, when THEY are the ones who allowed MEN to talk them out of believing the KJV?

The KJV produces good fruit, because the Holy Spirit bears witness to it like no other book in the world. It’s easier to memorize than any new version, and the beautiful old English language gives the reader the impression that he is reading a Book very different and far superior to the rest. It reads different because it IS different, and it IS different because it has a different Author. We shall know them “by their fruit”, and I know the King James Bible is the word of God, because it produces GOOD fruit.

Because the King James Translators Believed They Were Handling the Very Words of God

One can see this truth by reading the Prefatory and Dedicatory remarks in the Authorized Version. These men didn’t believe they were handling “God’s message” or “reliable manuscripts.” They believed they were handling the very words of God Himself. As I Thessalonians 2:13 says, they “. . . . received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe.”

Like the serpent of Genesis 3:1, modern translators approach the scriptures in skepticism, saying, “Yea, hath God said?” This was the first recorded sin in the Bible, and it still runs rapid through the hearts and minds of most scholars and new version promoters.

God has always allowed such people to be DECEIVED because of the IDOLS in their hearts (Ezek. 14:1-9; II Thess. 2:10-12; I Kings 22). A man who lacks faith in God’s word is in no condition to translate it. This eliminates every revision committee in the past one hundred years, because these committees have consisted mostly of highly educated men who were heady, high-minded, and proud, thinking that their intelligence qualified them to tamper with the pure words of God.

The KJV translators were not like this. Their scholarship FAR EXCEEDED that of modern translators, yet they remained humble and allowed God to use them in order to produce an infallible masterpiece. They didn’t set out to “judge” and “correct” the word of God. Their purpose was to translate God’s word for the English speaking people, as they were told to do by their appointed king. I know the King James Bible is the word of God because the KJV translators believed it themselves.

Because the King James Translators Were Honest In Their Work

The critics of the KJV enjoy making a fuss about the words in italics, which were added by the translators, but the argument is entirely unnecessary and unfair.

The italic words in the KJV actually PROVE that the translators were honest in their work. When translating from one language to another, the idioms change, thus making it necessary to add certain words to help the reader grasp the full meaning of the text. When the KJV translators added such words they set them in italics so that we’d know these words were added, UNLIKE we find it in so many new versions today, which do NOT use the italics.

Besides, no one has ever PROVEN that the italic words are not the words of God, because no one has “the originals” to check them with. In fact, we know for sure that the translators were led by the Holy Spirit to add at least some of the italicized words.

One good example of this is found in II Samuel 21:19. When the translators came to this verse in the Hebrew text, they noticed that an exact translation would give Elhanan credit for slaying Goliath, but we know from I Chronicles 20:5 that he actually slew THE BROTHER OF Goliath. So the KJV translators added the words “the brother of” to II Samuel 21:19. If the Lord had not led them to do so, then II Samuel 21:19 would contradict I Chronicles 20:5 (as it DOES in the New World Translation!).

Another fine example is I John 2:23. The last half of the verse was missing at the time, but the KJV translators inserted it anyhow (in italics), feeling that it was necessary. This naturally disturbed many people, but since that time new manuscripts have been found which CONTAIN the last half of I John 2:23. The translators were RIGHT in adding the italicized words.

One last example of the Holy Spirit’s guiding influence on the KJV translators is found in Psalm 16:8, which says, “I have set the LORD always before me: because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved.” As you can see, the words “he is” are in italics. According to many scholars they should be omitted, but according to the Apostle Peter they should NOT be omitted. Peter quotes Psalm 16:8 in Acts 2:25, and he USES the italicized words! How did the translators know this if the Lord didn’t lead them?

The italics in the King James Bible are the marks of an HONEST translation, for no one added these words to mislead us, or to change the word of God. They added the words to help us, and they set the words in italics so we’d know they were added. That’s honesty. I know the KJV is the word of God, because the translators were more honest in their work than any of the modern Bible translators.

Because All New Translations Compare Themselves to the KJV

The new versions do not compare themselves with each other, because they’re too busy comparing themselves with one Book–the King James Bible. This fact alone proves that there is something very special and unique about the KJV.

Why does everyone line up in opposition AGAINST the King James Bible? Why not attack one another? That’s easy: Satan has no desire to divide his own kingdom (Mt. 12:26). His desire is to discredit the word of GOD, not himself; so he attacks only one Book, God’s Book, the KJV.

Those who oppose the KJV are unsure of themselves, for they have no Final Authority; so they despise those of us who DO have an Authority. They’re unstable, insecure, dishonest, and very inconsistent. They’re all TERRIFIED of One Book, the KJV, and they’ll stop short of nothing in their efforts to rid the Body of Christ of that Book.

I know the KJV is the word of God, because it’s the standard which all others use for comparison.

Because of the Time in History in Which It Was Translated

The King James Bible was not translated during the apostate and lukewarm Laodicean church period, like the new translations. The Laodicean period is the last church period before the Second Coming of Christ. It is the last of the seven church periods in Revelation chapters two and three. One can clearly see that we are living in the Laodicean period today by simply comparing modern churches to the church of Revelation 3:14-22. This lukewarm period began toward the end of the 1800’s and will continue until Christ returns. The new versions fit well into the lukewarm churches, because they are lukewarm “bibles.”

The Authorized Version, however, was translated LONG BEFORE the Laodicean churches appeared. It was translated during the Philadelphia church period, which is the best church period of all. It was this church that the Lord Jesus COMMENDED for KEEPING HIS WORD( Rev. 3:8-10)!

In 1611, when the King James Bible was completed, the scourge of lukewarm Laodicea had not yet swept over the world. There was no “scientific” crowd around in 1611 to put pressure on the translators. There was no civil rights movement going on at this time to influence the work of these men. The women were not screaming for “equal rights,” and the humanists and socialists had not yet taken control. The massive army of liberal and modernistic preachers had not yet been assembled. The open public denial of God’s word and the Deity of Christ was practically unheard of among ministers. It wasn’t until the twentieth century that professing Christianity became flooded with lukewarm preachers who would be willing to compromise the word of God for self gain.

The greatest missionary work in church history occurred between 1700 and 1900, so it makes perfect sense that God would have a Bible ready for this great work, and He did – the KJV. Unfortunately, the new translations appeared a bit LATE on the scene! Think about that. I know the KJV is the word of God because of the time in history in which it was translated.

Because No One Has Ever Proven That the KJV is Not God’s Word

Any honest American should know that innocence is supposed to prevail in our land until guilt is proven. The KJV should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. Has anyone proven it guilty? No. Has any scholar actually PROVEN that there are errors in the King James Bible? No. Enemies of the KJV delight in IGNORING the facts about the Authorized Version, while never PROVING anything. All apparent “errors” in the KJV can be explained through prayer and a careful study of the scriptures, but the opponents of the KJV aren’t interested in looking for TRUTH; they’re interested attacking God’s word, while never proving anything. I know the KJV is the word of God, because, over nearly four hundred years, no one has proven otherwise.

Because of the Manuscript Evidence

Only a very deceived individual could believe that the new versions are equal to the King James Bible. Ninety-five percent of all evidence SUPPORTS the text of the King James Authorized Version. The new versions are supported by the remaining five percent evidence.

The new “bibles” are supported by two very corrupt fourth century manuscripts, known as the “Vaticanus” and the “Siniaticus.” These manuscripts are filled with many text alterations to meet the demands of Roman Catholic tradition. They also include the Apocrypha, which the Lord Jesus Christ EXCLUDED from the Old Testament in Luke 24:44. All new versions contain readings from these corrupt manuscripts, and all new versions use their tiny five percent evidence to attack the ninety-five percent majority text of the King James Bible.

The Textus Receptus (received text) from which the King James Bible came can be traced clear back to Antioch, Syria, where the disciples were first called Christians and where Paul and Barnabas taught the word of God for a whole year (Acts 11:26). The other “bibles” do not come from Antioch. They come from Alexandria, Egypt, and from Rome. We don’t need an Egyptian version, for Egypt is a type of the WORLD in the Bible. God called His people OUT of Egypt (Exod. 3-14), and God called His Son out of Egypt (Hos. 11:1 with Matt. 2:13-15). Why, the Bible says that “every shepherd is an abomination unto the Egyptians” in Gen. 46:34, and the Lord Jesus Christ is called a SHEPHERD in John chapter ten. Alexandria, Egypt, is associated with SUPERSTITION in Acts 28:11, and Aquilla and Pricilla had to set an Egyptian straight on his doctrine in Acts chapter 18. Alexandrians are also found DISPUTING WITH STEPHEN in Acts 6:9. So we don’t need a “bible” from Alexandria, Egypt.

Then there’s the Roman text, also called the “Western Text.” We can also do without a Roman “bible”, because it was ROMAN soldiers who nailed our Lord to the cross. The harlot of Revelation 17 is a perfect description of the Roman Catholic Church, which has persecuted Christians for thousands of years. Romans persecuted the Christians in Acts18:2, and in 70 A.D. the Romans destroyed Jerusalem. Rome is the “dreadful and terrible” beast of Daniel chapter seven, and Christ will destroy the “Revised Roman Empire” at the Second Coming (Dan. 2; 7; and Rev. 13). It has been estimated that Rome is guilty of the blood of some 200 million people who have rejected her corrupt system. A “bible” from Rome is another thing we can live without.

There’s only one line of manuscripts that we can trust, and this is the line from Antioch, called the “Syrian” or “Byzantine” type text. The word of God speaks POSITIVELY of Antioch, and NEGATIVELY of Rome and Egypt. We should TAKE THE BEST AND DUMP THE REST! I know the King James Bible is the word of God because of the manuscript evidence.

Because It Exalts the Lord Jesus Christ

Jesus said, “Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: And they are they which testify of me.” John 5:39.

A REAL Bible will testify of the Lord Jesus Christ. The true word of God will always EXALT Jesus Christ, and it will NEVER attack Hid Deity, His Virgin Birth, His Blood Atonement, His Bodily Resurrection, His Glorious Second Coming, or any other doctrines concerning His Person. However, the new versions attack ALL of the fundamental doctrines concerning the Lord Jesus Christ at one time or another.

By perverting the many important verses of scripture which deal with the fundamental doctrines of Christ, the new “bibles” have a CONTINUOUS ATTACK launched against our beloved Savior, and this is NOT an overstatement! His Virgin Birth is under attack in Isaiah 7:14, Luke 1:34, and Luke 2:33. His Blood Atonement is under attack in Colossians 1:14, Acts 20:28, Ephesians 1:7, and Revelation 1:5. The Bodily Resurrection is under attack in Acts 1:3, Luke chapter 24, and the last twelve verses of Mark. His Deity is under attack in Acts 10:28, John 9:35, and I Timothy 3:16. The new versions attack the Second Coming in Revelation 11:15, and Titus 2:13, and the list goes on, because the new versions have an extreme bitter HATRED toward the Authorized Version and the way it gives the Lord Jesus Christ the preeminent place.

If the reader doubts this, we challenge you to take whatever version you want and compare the above verses in it to the same verses in the King James Bible. If you still doubt it, after checking the verses, then write us and we will send you a great many more references to check. The new “bibles” have a very consistent record of attacking the Lord Jesus Christ; so they cannot possibly be “the scriptures” that He said would testify of Him in John 5:39. They testify AGAINST him.

The King James Bible NEVER attacks our Lord. More than any book in the world, the Authorized Version of the Protestant Reformation EXALTS the Lord Jesus Christ. If we had no other reason for receiving the Authorized Version as the word of God, this reason alone should be enough to convince any true believer, for how could we not become suspicious of the new versions for making such changes? I know the King James Bible is the word of God because it always exalts the Lord Jesus Christ.

Copyright © 1994 James L. Melton

This tract and others are available in printed form.
To Order Printed Tracts

Judging Deceivers -Evidence vs. Emotion

October 31, 2016 Leave a comment

To Judge or not to Judge Deception and Deceivers

Dr. Mike Johnston

 

                Do ye not know that the saints shall judge [1]the world? (1 Cor 6:2).

 

Mr. Tolerance challenged Mr. Truth to a debate. Mr. PC was moderator. All the major networks carried it except Fox which was not allowed. All went well until Truth quoted Scripture and Mr. PC accused Truth of being judgmental which sent Tolerance and his crowd into a cheering frenzy; causing Truth to throw in the towel, limp off stage, and hide his head in shame. While this encounter began centuries ago, it has only become obvious lately. Back in 1975 when I was saved, there was still a modicum of light shining through a rapidly darkening horizon. Fundamentalists were standing and truth was creating fresh hunger in many hearts. Hardly anyone paid attention to Satan’s oldest trick in the Book let alone its ramifications once published: impugn the Word of God- yea, hath God said (Gen 3:1), and then present an easier to understand translation contradicting it (Gen 3: 4-5). How my heart aches to watch many of the ramparts of Fundamentalism become defectors of the King James Bible by preaching modernist versions from Romanist manuscripts lacking thousands of words while making audacious claims that it just doesn’t matter. Is it any wonder people are so easily deceived?

 

Hear me friend. Playing fast and loose with the Word of God is dangerous and demonic; yet it is at the core of the end times delusion. This of course has caused right and wrong to exchange seats at the table with hardly a word from Bible believers. I received a letter from a man some time ago confirming this. He was far more upset with me for excoriating a heretic than he was with the heresies I had exposed. His reason was solely based on one quote from the Lord Jesus pulled from its context: judge not lest ye be judged (Matt 7:1). But was it the intention of the Lord Jesus to silence Christian voices in an unsavory world? I don’t believe it was.  Dr. William MacDonald [2] agrees:

 

“Sometimes these words of our Lord are misconstrued by people to prohibit all forms of judgment. No matter what happens, they piously say, “Judge not, that you be not judged.” But Jesus is not teaching that we are to be undiscerning Christians. He never intended that we abandon our critical faculty or discernment. The NT has many illustrations of legitimate judgment of the condition, conduct, or teaching of others. In addition, there are several areas in which the Christian is commanded to make a decision, to discriminate between good and bad or between good and best.”

 

To be sure, the “judge not” quote is one of the most misrepresented verses in the Bible, and is the one unabashedly trotted out by liberals seeking a gotcha moment allowing them to label anyone who disagrees with them as “mean spirited bigots.” How disingenuous of them to jump to judge us while overlooking another of the Lord’s warnings: ye shall know them by their fruits (Mat 7:16). Is it not possible for these false accusers to understand that in order to know a person’s fruit you must first judge the actions of the person? Or are these scallywags representing something other than integrity? I’ll explain.

 

Serious Bible students know that the last days herald an unprecedented time of deception. The Lord Jesus warned about this at least 4 times in Matthew twenty-four (4,5,11,24). Paul reinforced Christ’s words with the following prophecy: But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived (2Ti 3:13).  Peter called them false prophets and teachers bringing damnable heresies (2 Pet 2:1-3); and John revealed them doing all manner of well-staged miracles (Rev 16:14); all in a kind of regal preparation for the man of sin: For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh. This is a deceiver and an antichrist (2 John 1:7). Much to the dismay of the “judge not” crowd, each of the prophecies above require judgment in order to obey them.

 

Mutual exclusives: Reason and liberalism           

 

My experience with liberals in the “quit judging me” camp tells me their entire political and religious position unravels when reason is forced upon it.

 

First reason: The judicial system in America is based on rendering judgment and Christians are often called as jurors. Are they disobeying the Lord Jesus by fulfilling their civic duty? Nonsense!

Second reason: Christians are to be the salt of the earth and the light of the world (Matt 5:13-14) which mandates that we judge righteous judgment (John 7:24) in two arenas requiring it:  the world and the church.

Third reason: Untold numbers of Scriptures challenge us to eschew evil and embrace good (Psa 34:14, etc) which requires judgment.

Fourth reason: Many more Scriptures give us mandates that are impossible without judging. I’ve listed a few with my comments in [brackets].

  • Romans 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them [take aim at] which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them [marking and  avoiding them is predicated on judging them].
  • Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? (1 Corinthians 6:2)- [we are judges by divine appointment as born again saints of our holy, righteous God!]
  • And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove [blame; censure] them (Ephesians 5:11).
  • For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ: Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things [Philippians 3:18-19]- [knowing and pointing out these enemies of the cross requires judgment]
  • A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject [Titus 3:10]- [this requires that you first judge the person’s teachings as heretical. If they are, you must reject them]
  • Beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world. (1 John 4:1)- [again, this requires judgment of a person’s spirit]

 

Let’s take the tolerance vs. truth test

 

EXAMPLE 1. An ordained man is a San Francisco preacher. He leads a fairly large church reaching the forgotten and the downtrodden, and in his emotionally charged messages often employs quotes from Jesus and the Bible. Over time he convinces his congregants that the world is about to end but that he is their saviour. Most of them sell their belongings, give him the money, and move to the city of hope in Guyana, South America that is named after him; Jonestown.

 

EXAMPLE 2. A neighboring group claims to be Christian. They study the Bible, pray, evangelize, promote family values, and generally live lives above reproach. They also have canonized the teachings of a perverted polygamist named Joseph Smith who promoted a plethora of heresies including denying the trinity and deity of Christ, polytheism, baptism for the dead, the deity of man and others. They are Mormons.

 

EXAMPLE 3. For years major denominations have defected from orthodoxy (Methodists, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, some Baptists, etc). Growing numbers of them no longer believe the Bible is inerrant, infallible, and inspired. As such, they support abortion, teach evolution, and ordain women, and preside over sodomite “marriage” ceremonies.

 

Question: With what you’ve just read about the above groups- and assuming what is reported is factual- if one of your loved ones (son, daughter, sibling), or a dear friend was about to embrace the teachings of these hereticks, would you close your eyes to the truth and simply tolerate them?

 

If you answered no I congratulate you; you have rendered righteous judgment (John 7:24; see Lev. 19:15), which we are called to do as Christians. May I welcome you to the uncompromising world of Biblical separation (2 Cor. 6:14-17)[3] where I live and have chosen to contend for the faith once delivered (Jude 1:3)!

 

In closing

 

And they shall teach my people the difference between the holy and profane, and cause them to discern between the unclean and the clean (Eze 44:23).

 

Hear me friend. There’s a clear choice to be made here but there are consequences.

 

First, if you choose to expose evil for what it is, you won’t be invited to preach in as many churches; you won’t win any ecumenical unity awards; you probably won’t have as many friends as you once did, and if you’re a missionary, you might even lose some of your much needed support base.

 

However, if you in any way accommodate the politically correct “judge not” mindset, I promise you these sneaky sniveling snakes will slither into your church via television, books, internet, and other means, where they will saturate the willing hearts of your people with so much deceit they will in time convince your friends and church members that you are the problem that must be disposed of [4] and they will set out to do it with a great feeling of divine justification!

 

That being the case isn’t it high time we started judging deceivers and their deceptions in the Biblical manner to which we’ve been called?

[1] Webster’s Dictionary 1828 defines judging as “hearing and determining; forming an opinion; dooming.” That being the case, judging is our heritage and our future.

[2] The Believer’s Bible Commentary us available for a gift of $34 to PMI. Stamps are welcome.

[3] For more detailed discussion, you may order our tract entitled Biblical Separation.

[4] Arnold Murray of Shepherd’s Chapel is a great example of a vile heretical wolf who turned  three otherwise supportive family units against me when I tried to warn them about his heresies.

 

Anti-PreTrib Gotcha Allegation: The Rapture was never taught until 1830

October 21, 2016 Leave a comment

From THE BODY OF CHRIST WILL NOT GO THROUGH ISRAEL’S TRIBULATION by Dr Mike Johnston

That’s not true. However, you’d think it is since it’s impossible to discuss the rapture without hearing that it’s a satanic plot that never existed until 1830. (see rebuttal in Appendix [i]). This argument forms the crux of a hook or crook campaign waged by rapture antagonists wishing to wedge the church into the “time of Jacob’s trouble” (Jer. 30:7) – where she can’t be seen and doesn’t belong. Paradoxically, while their battle boasts strict Biblical auspices it hasn’t been waged sola scriptura. It has risen instead on the back of untruthful accusations disguised as “scholarship” from men conflating God’s plan for Israel with His plan for the church that over time has proven to be part of the an unhinged scheme with impure motives.

The plot began as an allegation beaten like a jungle drum since the 1970s by a neurotic [1] rapture-loathing newsman named Dave MacPherson.[ii] Borrowing and twisting the undocumented claims of Textus Receptus enemy Samuel Tregelles – MacPherson [2]has amassed a cult like following for what has become a franchise of slanderous [iii] writings [3] presenting the rapture [4] as a pervasive fraud with an elaborate cover up hiding a dubious origin.[5]

Dave’s drivel

The alleged conspiracy – unverified yet ballyhooed by a crowing coterie of contrarians – centers around a demon possessed charismatic girl named Margaret MacDonald [6]  who in 1830 is said to have conjured up the PreTrib rapture [7] in a dream while she was a member of Edward Irving’s [8] Catholic Apostolic Church. [9] According to MacPherson’s mythos, that’s when the great Bible scholar and dispensationalist John Nelson Darby pirated it for his own use then gave it to CI Scofield to publish in his reference Bible as part of a sinister plot to deceive Christians for no apparent reason other than the indescribable joy both men received from misleading people.[10] To make matters worse, no one – including Tregelles, MacPherson, nor any of their lackey loyalists – has ever provided a shred of credible proof linking Darby or Scofield directly to plagiarizing MacDonald or to any of these appalling activities. Commenting on the entire charade, Dr. John Walvoord wrote, “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.” Walvoord continues, “Pretribulationists should be indebted to Dave MacPherson for exposing the facts, namely, that there is no proof that MacDonald … originated the pretribulation rapture teaching.”

Sadly, truth is meaningless to an activist with an agenda. In the absence of evidence, MacPherson’s minions fill their books and blogs with a daisy chain of chicanery from bibliographical references listing him and one another as their sources. [11] This then is glibly passed off as scholarship to their low information audience who don’t give a rip about Biblical integrity as long as it comes to the agreed upon anti-rapture conclusion their contentious cabal coagulates around.

After a lengthy and fair examination of the “facts” linking Darby to a demonic charismatic vision, post-trib proponent even John Bray conceded, “He [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.”[12]

Dave’s friends deserted him

The entire MacPherson 1830 rapture ruse reminds me of the book of Esther. Haman was a pompous prevaricating political insider who over estimated his value to the king. He was also a rabid anti-Semite who in a fit of rage ordered gallows built to lynch his nemesis, Esther’s uncle Mordecai. Ironically, once the king discovered Haman’s lies, the nefarious accommodations he’d built for Mordecai served quite adequately to hang Haman and his household instead. Divine reciprocity at its best!

In my opinion, Mr. MacPherson did the same thing using his mendacity as the gallows to destroy the rapture. Surely as a seasoned reporter, he must have expected the scrutiny from PreTrib scholars like Dr. Walvoord and others [13] he received. However, how could he foresee the backlash from fellow post trib journalists he thought would cover for him? After examining his spurious allegations, they did the unthinkable; they stood him up by unmasking his deception in full view of everyone paying attention. [14]

The irony here is like a well scripted play. MacPherson’s elaborate scheme representing the rapture as a big lie was in the end itself unmasked using a bigger lie to do it; eerily similar to the strategy outlined in the Josef Goebbels Propaganda Playbook [15] don’t you think?

I’ll close this section with a final though from MacPherson researcher Frank Morotta,

“It is significant that MacPherson is the lone ‘historian’ who has argued a connection between MacDonald and Darby. [16] 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.”

The end of it? Hardly. As long as Dave can sell books containing his tirades and twaddle, the satanic plot masking the real circumstances surrounding the origin of the rapture will no doubt continue its charade virtually unabated.

[1] If you‘ve read his materials you would know what I’m talking about. MacPherson actually blames proponents of the PreTrib rapture for all of his misfortunes, beginning with his expulsion from Bible college, a drunken binge in Mexico, a car accident, his mom’s death, his sister’s inability to have more children, the demonic possession of his dog, and all his father’s woes.

https://www.raptureready.com/who/Dave_MacPherson.html

[2] MacPherson’s allegations are outlandish to say the least. He incessantly pounds the drum that all who teach a PreTrib rapture are somehow culpable in the death of millions of Christians worldwide (especially the Chinese) that had been taught the rapture and suffered martyrdom! The fact is, Christians of every age- whether or not they have believed the PreTrib rapture- have suffered persecution, including today at the hands of islamic savages. While MacPherson deems it unfair that God would spare us what others were not spared begs the notion God will have to resurrect every person in history who was not vigorously and viciously persecuted or martyred. This is simply one of their most desperate- and may I add, deceptive- attempts at discrediting the PreTrib position. MacPherson and his minions should be ashamed of themselves.

[3] Titles include “The Incredible Cover-Up”, “The Great Rapture Hoax”, “The Rapture Plot”, ad nauseum.

[4] Since our opponents’ case is weak, they grab for straws. One tactic they love to employ is the notion that “rapture” isn’t found in the Bible as if that would disqualify it as a doctrine. We remind them neither is the word Bible in the Scriptures. Rapture is transliterated from the Latin repere or rapto found in 1 Thess. 4:17 where the King James renders it “caught up.”

[5] The outrageous nature of MacPherson’s prevarications have increased over time as books emerge under his name charging new cover ups that unbiased scholarship finds laughably ludicrous. Frank Marotta of according2prophecy.org writes: His 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.

[6] The rise in belief in the pre-tribulation rapture is often wrongly attributed to a 15-year-old Scottish-Irish girl named Margaret McDonald who was of the first to receive a (alleged) spiritual baptism under a Pentecostal awakening in Scotland. In 1830, she had a vision of the end times which describes a post-tribulation view of the rapture that was first published in 1840. It was published again in 1861, but two important passages demonstrating a post-tribulation view were removed to encourage confusion concerning the timing of the rapture. The two removed segments were, “This is the fiery trial which is to try us. – It will be for the purging and purifying of the real members of the body of Jesus” and “The trial of the Church is from Antichrist. It is by being filled with the Spirit that we shall be kept” [Hommel, Jason. “Margaret MacDonald’s Vision” – Jason Hommel’s Bible Prophecy Study on the Pre Tribulation Rapture. Grass Valley, California. Retrieved 23 January 2011. Quotes the account in The Restoration of Apostles and Prophets In the Catholic Apostolic Church (1861).]

[7] “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]

[8] 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]

[9] Here’s a few problems. First, Miss MacDonald’s “prophecy” doesn’t contain any elements related to a pre-trib rapture [Read her prophecy and you’ll find she believed in several raptures and that the church would suffer under Antichrist]. Therefore, in order to get his theory in line with the narrative, he had to conflate the two accounts of Margaret’s vision. Second, no one has ever demonstrated from actual facts of history that Darby was influenced by MacDonald’s “prophecy” even if it had contained pre-trib elements – which it certainly did not. There is evidence that Darby heard about Miss MacDonald’s strange vision and labeled it demonic. Third, according to biographer historian Roy Huebner R. A. Huebner, “Precious Truths Revived and Defended Through J. N. Darby”, Vol. 1 (Morganville, N. J.: Present Truth Publishers, 1991), Darby clearly held to an early form of the PreTrib rapture by January 1827. This is a full three years before MacPherson’s claim of 1830. John Walvoord has said, “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.” More information available at

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

[10] This is another desperate and disingenuous deception from the other side. Roy Huebner documented from Darby’s writings beginning as early as 1827 that he was teaching a PreTrib rapture.

[11] And this they want you to believe is scholarly reporting.

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

[13] Drs. Thomas Ice and Gerald Stanton among them.

[14] Post tribulation rapture author Ernest Sandeen wrote: “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. Others include Robert Reiter, Ian Rennie, William Bell, John Bray, and Timothy Weber to name a few. Source: http://www.pre-trib.org/articles/view/part-2-myths-of-origin-rapture

[15] One of the most successful strategies Josef Goebbels facilitated in the Nazi rise to power over Germany was the “Big Lie” propaganda ploy. Briefly, he believed if a lie was big enough and told often enough the people would eventually embrace it. The fact that Hitler slaughtered 6 million Jews virtually uncontested by Germans proves just how powerful this strategy is.

[16] Excuse my reiteration of some of this material, but it is vital that you recognize and refute the prejudicial arguments these people have invented. Brethren writer, Roy A. Huebner claims and documents his belief that J.N. Darby first began to believe in the pre-trib rapture and develop his dispensational thinking while convalescing from a riding accident during December 1826 and January 1827.12 If this is true, then all of the origin-of-the-rapture-conspiracy-theories fall to the ground in a heap of speculative rubble. Darby would have at least a three-year jump on any who would have supposedly influenced his thought, making it impossible for all the “influence” theories to have any credibility. Huebner provides clarification and evidence that Darby was not influenced by a fifteen-yea-old girl (Margaret Macdonald), Lacunza, Edward Irving, or the Irvingites. These are all said by the detractors of Darby and the pre-trib rapture to be bridges which led to Darby’s thought. Instead, he demonstrates that Darby’s understanding of the pre-trib rapture was the product of the development of his personal interactive thought with the text of Scripture as he, his friends, and dispensationalists have long contended. Darby’s pre-trib and dispensational thoughts, says Huebner, were developed from the following factors: 1) “he saw from Isaiah 32 that there was a different dispensation coming . . . that Israel and the Church were distinct.” 2) “During his convalescence JND learned that he ought daily to expect his Lord’s return.” 3) “In 1827 JND understood the fall of the church. . . ‘the ruin of the Church.'” 4) Darby also was beginning to see a gap of time between the rapture and the second coming by 1827. 5) Darby, himself, said in 1857 that he first started understanding things relating to the pre-trib Rapture “thirty years ago.” “With that fixed point of reference, Jan. 31, 1827,” declares Huebner, we can see that Darby “had already understood those truths upon which the pre-tribulation rapture hinges.” [Dr Thomas Ice-  https://www.raptureready.com/featured/ice/tt11.html%5D

[i] The PreTrib Rapture Teaching is NOT NEW

After animated author and apologist Doc Marquis had his fill of this feckless flimflam he wrote, “The blatant lie (knowingly or unknowingly) that the “Pre-Tribulation Rapture” of the Church is a new concept that can only be traced back to 1830 is simply that … a lie! I shall now present to you good people another literary list and, this one will prove, once and for all, that the “Pre-Tribulation Rapture” of the Church is “not” a new concept, but was a teaching that came directly from the Apostles themselves (dating back) “before” 1830” . . . to the 1st Century A.D.”

1) 1792 – Thomas Scott – he taught that the righteous will be carried to Heaven where they will be secure until the time of the judgment is over.

2) 1763 – James Macknight – he also taught that the righteous will be carried to heaven until the judgment is over with.

3) 1748 – John Gill (Commentary on the New Testament) – teaches of the imminent return of Christ, firstly in Rapture, and then He will return again to judge the earth (Armageddon).

4) 1744 – Morgan Edwards (founder of the Ivy League School, Brown University) wrote of his “Pre-Tribulation Rapture” beliefs.

5) 1738 – Phillip Doddrige (Commentary on the New Testament) teaches along the same lines of John Gill; a “Pre-Tribulation Rapture” perspective.

6) 1687 – Peter Jurieu – (“Approaching Deliverance of the Church”) Christ would return during the Rapture and take His saints to Heaven and later return at the Battle of Armageddon.

7) 1674 – 1748 – Isaac Watts (known as the Father of the English Hymn) wrote of his “Pre-Tribulation Rapture” belief. (As a side note, Isaac Watts was solely responsible for writing over 1,000 Christian hymns if I recall the numbers correctly. Study his life because it was truly a miraculous one by all definitions of the word).

8) 1674 – Thomas Collier – makes reference in the belief to the “Pre-Tribulation Rapture”.

9) 1532 – 1591 – Francisco Rivera wrote of his “Pre-Tribulation Rapture” of the Church beliefs

10) 431 – 1500 – Any mention of Pre-Tribulation (Millennial) Rapture of the Church perspectives are outlawed by the Catholic Church and deemed heretical and punishable by death!!!

11) 431 – The Council of Ephesus; the Catholic Church decrees and condemns Pre-Millennial views as heresy. Books and such are destroyed or altered.

The following all wrote of the “Pre-Tribulation Rapture” of the Church:

12) 354 – 430 – Augustine, Bishop of North Africa

13) 306 – 373 – Ephraem of Nisibus

14) ? – 204 – Victorinus, Bishop of Petau

15) 200 – 258 – Cyrian

16) 170 – 236 – Hippolytus of Rome

17) 150 – 272 – Apocalypse of Elijah (an Extra-Biblical book)

18) 120 – 202 – Ireaneus (“Against Heresies”)

19) 36 – 108 – Ignatius of Antioch, the Third Bishop and Patriarch of Antioch (who as a student of John the Apostle) – His “Letters of Extra-Biblical works are:

  1. Letter to the Ephesians
  2. Letter to the Magnesians
  3. Letter to the Trallians
  4. Letter to the Romans
  5. Letter to the Philadelphians
  6. Letter to the Smyrnaeans
  7. Letter to Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna
  8. ? – 99 A.D. – Clement of Rome, “Letter to the Corinthians” also known as “I Clement” (an Extra-Biblical book). 

John Bray’s $500 Folly

Arrogant and antagonistic describes the majority of the anti-PreTrib gang I’ve encountered, personally and by reading their books and blogs. Most are so certain of MacPherson’s unproven allegation of an 1830 rapture origin they link their entire journalistic integrity to it by making outlandish statements that have been refuted hundreds of times by PreTrib rapture scholars.

One of the more foolhardy stunts came from John L. Bray, a Southern Baptist evangelist, who offered $500 to anyone who could prove that someone taught the rapture doctrine prior to MacDonald’s 1830 vision. Interestingly, Bray displayed a modicum of integrity when his own research proved himself wrong. He wrote, “Then my own research indicated that it was Emmanuel Lacunza, a Jesuit Catholic priest, who in the 1812 book The Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty, first taught this theory.”

However, Bray – like those of his stubborn ilk – was determined to win the bet and he  stuck his neck out again with another $500 offer to anyone who could provide a documented statement earlier than Lacunza’s 1812 writings. Apparently he had to cough up the 500 bucks. I quote him again: “I offered $500 to anyone who would give a documented statement earlier than Lacunza’s time which taught a two-stage coming of Christ separated by a stated period of time.” No one claimed that offer until someone found writings that forced Bray to write the following: “Now I have the Photostat copies of a book published in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, in 1788 but written in 1742-1744 in England, which taught the pretribulation rapture before Lacunza.”

[ii] Dave MacPherson’s Book “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 Version 

(One of) MacPherson’s latest (books) 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, (a significant 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. Source: http://www.according2prophecy.org/macphers.html

[iii] More MacPhersonism

If you’ve read any of Dave’s materials, you know he makes some outlandish claims then vilifies all who disagree with his questionable conclusions generally in the form of a relentless unchristian assault. It begins by impugning the person’s character and credentials and ends with condemning their souls to Hell forever. Egregious assumptions and accusations often earmark a desperate person on the wrong side of a debate. Such is the case with the tribulation and the rapture. Those of us holding to the historic Biblical position (see Appendices) of a rapture before the tribulation are verbally vandalized by unscrupulous men thinking nothing of consigning souls to hell simply for daring to impugn their “creative” scholarship with facts. Think about the far-reaching scope of these unsavory and unchristian epithets implicating Bible scholars throughout history who taught the Word with integrity Paul, Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Hippolytus. More recently, John Nelson Darby, CI Scofield, Charles Spurgeon, DL Moody, HA Ironside, RA Torrey, Arno C. Gaebelein, J. Dwight Pentecost, Harold Willmington, Ed Hindson, Zola Levitt, Renald Showers, Randell Price, David Hocking, John Walvoord, Mark Hitchcock, Tommy Ice, Chuck Missler, Lehman Strauss, Grant Jeffrey, Hal Lindsey, JR Church, Dave Hunt, Gary Stearman, Tim LaHaye, Jack Van Impe and on and on. And while this impressive list does not in itself prove the dispensational, PreTrib position, it certainly makes a strong statement in favor of the historic PreTrib doctrine especially when compared with the cadre of unfamiliar names attached to the roster of those opposing it.

____________________

 

The PMI Center for Biblical Studies is an Independent, Fundamental, King James Bible Teaching Christian school offering College and Seminary level courses in Apologetics, Biblical Studies, Christian Ed, Counseling (Nouthetic), Creation, Ministry, Prophecy, Religious Ed, Scofield Bible, and Theology thru distance education since 1981. Students interested in college level Bible and ministry prep study programs may request the first of 8 Lessons in the prerequisite Foundations of Theology Study Project.

 

 

 

 

Á

“See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise,
Redeeming the time, because the days are evil” (Ephesians 5:15-16)

 

 

 

 

 

 

PMI Center for Biblical Studies

POB 177 – Battle Creek, MI 49016-0177 – PmiMinistries.com

The 5 Fundamentals of Fundamentalism

 

Dr. Mike Johnston, Editor 

“Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation, it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints” (Jude 1:3)

Every generation of Bible believers faces its own barrage if heretics and heresies. Acts 15 describes an early church counsel established for the purpose of considering the notion that Christians had to become obedient to the Jewish Law which they soundly refuted.

Creeping liberalism that virtually destroyed faith in Europe was another problem that needed to be confronted by Bible believing pastors and teachers in America. In his landmark book “Heart Disease in Christ’s Body” Dr. Jack Van Impe defined the 5 tenets of Fundamentalism that men of God formulated as a standard statement of the faithful:

“The twentieth century began with a tumultuous conservative uproar over the infiltration of numerous denominations by liberalism. The severity of the situation demanded immediate action. Heretical teachings were captivating and corrupting entire churches, schools and related organizations within multiplied denominations. Therefore, a coalition of interdenominational brethren, following a number of conferences, united around the five ‘fundamentals’ of the faith. They were:

  1. The inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture
  2. The deity of Jesus Christ
  3. The virgin birth of Christ
  4. The substitutionary, atoning work of Christ on the cross
  5. The physical resurrection and the personal bodily return of Christ to the earth.

“The adherents to these five ‘fundamental’ truths were naturally labeled ‘fundamentalists.’ Those opposing them were called ‘liberals.’

“The men joining together around these five points (commonly called ‘the doctrine of Christ’) were from varied and diversified religious backgrounds. Thus, this amalgamation of ‘first generation fundamentalists’ included Presbyterians, Baptists, Reformers, Reformed Episcopalians, Lutherans, Methodists, Anglicans, Congregationalists, and Wesleyan Holiness brothers. The astounding thing about the members of this interdenominational movement was their love for one another.” (pp. 127-128).

Fundamentalists today should add the following to the list of doctrines we need to contend for:

The preservation of God’s Word in the King James Bible

Israel and the church are completely separate entities

The evils of the Pope and Romanism

The dangers of the Charismatic/Latter Rain movements

Categories: Fundamentalism, Misc
%d bloggers like this: