Post tribulation theory claims that an early action of the Lord's "harpazo" was contrived by a building on Margaret Mcdonald's visions by Darby. They use this example to support their case. Careful reading of her questionable claims indicates that she was actually describing a post tribulational teaching .... not the other way around. Those who use this story to discredit pre-tribulational thinking have stumbled over a perpetrated lie and have been duped by those who promote it.

Article:

Margaret Macdonald has often been either upheld as a visionary, or blamed for "inventing" the pre-tribulational rapture of the Church. This is a very complicated matter, and people tend to take opposite sides without knowing many facts. Margaret Macdonald, a young Christian living in Port Glasgow, Scotland certainly received a revelation which was then written and re-written, circulated and first published in 1840, some ten years later. Not long after her revelation, she wrote down her account of everything and sent hand-written copies of it to a number of Christian leaders. The Morning Watch, a leading British publication, quickly copied some of her distinctive notions. Her revelation was first published in Robert Norton's Memoirs of James & George Macdonald, of Port Glasgow (1840), pp. 171-176. Norton published it again in The Restoration of Apostles and Prophets; In the Catholic Apostolic Church (1861), pp. 15-18. Writers such as Dave MacPherson, ("The Great Rapture Hoax") in an effort to denounce the Rapture teaching as demonic and dangerous, linked Margaret to the young lady known only as "Miss M.M." who had stood up in an Irvingite service in LONDON in 1831 and given a word that purportedly spoke of the rapture BEFORE the Second Coming, at that time a novel idea (but not wholly unheard of, as we shall see.) Thus he and others levelled the charge that she was amongst the demonised false prophets who were causing "disturbances" in Edward Irving's church at the time. However, it is by no means proven that this Miss M.M. is the same person as the Margaret Macdonald who circulated a written revelation she had received WHILE STUDYING THE SCRIPTURES in 1830 in SCOTLAND! But more importantly, while writers like Dave MacPherson read into Margaret's revelation all kinds of pre-trib notions in an attempt to find an occultic origin for the pre-trib Rapture, the teaching quite plainly IS NOT THERE. [What is there, I think you will agree as you read it, is interesting in another way because it prefigures much of today's revivalist teaching.]

Was Margaret a Dispensationalist? Margaret was herself more influenced by the prevailing historicist view of the day than the futurist view that developed in later years. Two portions of the revelation, in particular, seem to indicate a POST-TRIB belief. These portions are marked with emphasis below. It is hard work indeed, using this revelation, to prove that Christians will be taken out before the tribulation or arrival of Antichrist. Historicism - the belief that the prophecies of Revelation are being worked out slowly through history since the time of the Ascension - had become the accepted view by the 19th century. However, is this what the early Church believed? Scholars looking at the teaching of the Apostles and the early Church Fathers have come to the conclusion that historicism was NOT held by them to be the correct interpretation of scripture. They were FUTURISTS and PRE-MILLENNIALISTS.

GENERAL EPISTLE OF BARNABUS ...from the editor's and translators preface: "It has been cited by Clemens, Alexandrinus, Origen, Eusebius, Jerome, and many ancient Fathers. Cotelerius affirms that Origen and Jerome esteemed it genuine and canonical........" "Lost Books of the Bible" World Bible Publishing, copyright 1926 by Alpha House Pages 160-161 Barnabas 13:3-6, 9 (3) And in the beginning of the creation he makes mention of the sabbath. And God made in six days the works of his hands; and he finished them on the seventh day, and rested the seventh day, and sanctified it. (4) Consider, my children, what that signifies, he finished them in six days. The meaning of it is this; that in six thousand years the Lord God will bring all things to an end. (5) For with him one day is as a thousand years; as himself testifieth, saying, Behold this day shall be as a thousand years. Therefore children, in six days, that is, in six thousand years, that all things shall be accomplished. (6) And what is that he saith, And he rested the seventh day: he meaneth this; that when his Son shall come, and abolish the season of the Wicked One, and judge the ungodly; and shall change the sun and the moon and the stars; and he shall gloriously rest in that seventh day. -snip- (9) Lastly he saith unto them; Your new moons and your sabbaths I cannot bear them. Consider what he means by it; the sabbaths, says he, which ye now keep are not acceptable unto me, but those which I have made; when resting from all things I shall begin the eighth day, that is, the beginning of the other world. The Above is the earliest eschatological discourse on record. The Early Church obviously believed in a future 1000 year Millennium.

That is, they believed the words of Revelation, the prophecies of Daniel and the warnings and promises of Jesus to refer to definite, literal, future events, and that the Return of Christ would come BEFORE and LEAD TO a literal thousand-year reign of righteousness and peace on earth. It was only after Emperor Constantine gave his official sanction to the Christian faith that the view developed that Christ was now reigning on earth through the government of the Church, (A-millennialism), and that prophecy was not fulfilled literally but allegorically in and through the Church. However, views varied, and from time to time other opinions on prophecy became popular. People began to look for a greater measure of peace and stability on earth than that provided by a fallen Church. In 1703, Daniel Whitby taught a version of Post-Millennialism, with the Church coming into a golden age of victory and power before the Lord's Return. The Historicist view of prophecy attached ever more fanciful historical interpretations to the prophecies of Revelation which time and again proved false. The majority of Protestant (reformed) teachers up to the 19th century were a-millennial or post-millennial historicists. They did not read prophecy literally, but symbolised everything down to the smallest detail in an attempt to fit events into the Church era. Thus the prophecies of Antichrist were being fulfilled in the Papacy and in successive Popes as an ongoing present evil. However, around the 19th century there was a move towards a Futurist interpretation of prophecy. This did not happen all at once, but was developed in stages through various scholars, some of them within the Roman Catholic system, and some outside.

Ribera Franciscus de Ribera in 1580 wrote a book that was a mixture of a-millennialism, historicism and futurism. He began with the seals opening in the time of Christ, but much of the book of Revelation he interpreted literally at some future date.

Lacunza Manuel de Lacunza was another Catholic who defied the Roman traditional beliefs in order to write (secretly and under threat of discovery) about prophecy from a futurist viewpoint, though many of his beliefs and theories would seem strange to us today. His book "The Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty" (completed in 1790) was written under the pen-name of Ben-Ezra to avoid exposure. It was placed on the Index of Forbidden Books by Rome in 1824.

However, Edward Irving obtained a copy and translated it into English. From his foreword we see that Irving disagreed, profoundly at times, with Lacunza's views. Nevertheless, the futurist interpretation of prophecy was making a welcome come-back from the days of the early Church, and soon more and more Christians studying the scriptures came to the conclusion, as Lacunza had, that much of the endtimes scenario was yet to come.

Lacunza and the Rapture It has often been asserted (in ignorance of Lacunza's book) that this man was the first to propose a pre-trib Rapture. Actually, Lacunza did nothing of the sort. His only reference to the removal of the saints makes it plain that they had endured throughout the Tribulation. However, he suggested that there would be a short time-period, of 45 days, between the "epiphany" (the appearance of the Lord in glory from Heaven) and the "parousia", (the coming to earth). Lacunza suggested that the 45 days would be a time of judgement upon earth where the wrath of God was poured out on God's enemies. The millennial reign of Christ would follow. However, this is a very different doctrine from the invisible catching away and resurrection of the believers before the Tribulation. The pre-trib rapture is not to be found in Lacunza's book.

What follows is the version of Margaret Macdonald's revelation as published in The Restoration of Apostles and Prophets In the Catholic Apostolic Church (1861).

MARGARET'S REVELATION "It was first the awful state of the land that was pressed upon me. I saw the blindness and infatuation of the people to be very great. I felt the cry of Liberty just to be the hiss of the serpent, to drown them in perdition. It was just 'no God.' I repeated the words, Now there is distress of nations, with perplexity, the seas and the waves roaring, men's hearts failing them for fear. Now look out for the sign of the Son of Man. Here I was made to stop and cry out, O it is not known what the sign of the Son of Man is; the people of God think they are waiting, but they know not what it is. I felt this needed to be revealed, and that there was great darkness and error about it; but suddenly what it was burst upon me with a glorious light. I saw it was just the Lord himself descending from Heaven with a shout, just the glorified man, even Jesus; but that all must, as Stephen was, be filled with the Holy Ghost, that they might look up, and see the brightness of the Father's glory. I saw the error to be, that men think that it will be something seen by the natural eye; but 'tis spiritual discernment that is needed, the eye of God in his people. Many passages were revealed, in a light in which I had not before seen them. I repeated, 'Now is the kingdom of Heaven like unto ten virgins, who went forth to meet the Bridegroom, five wise and five foolish; they that were foolish took their lamps, but took no oil with them; but they that were wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.' 'But be ye not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is; and be not drunk with wine wherein is excess, but be filled with the Spirit.' This was the oil the wise virgins took in their vessels - this is the light to be kept burning - the light of God - that we may discern that which cometh not with observation to the natural eye. Only those who have the light of God within them will see the sign of his appearance. No need to follow them who say, see here, or see there, for his day shall be as the lightning to those in whom the living Christ is. 'Tis Christ in us that will lift us up - he is the light - 'tis only those that are alive in him that will be caught up to meet him in the air. I saw that we must be in the Spirit, that we might see spiritual things. John was in the Spirit, when he saw a throne set in Heaven. But I saw that the glory of the ministration of the Spirit had not been known. I repeated frequently, but the spiritual temple must and shall be reared, and the fullness of Christ be poured into his body, and then shall we be caught up to meet him. Oh none will be counted worthy of this calling but his body, which is the church, and which must be a candlestick all of gold. I often said, Oh the glorious inbreaking of God which is now about to burst on this earth; Oh the glorious temple which is now about to be reared, the bride adorned for her husband; and Oh what a holy, holy bride she must he, to be prepared for such a glorious bridegroom. I said, Now shall the people of God have to do with realities - now shall the glorious mystery of God in our nature be known - now shall it be known what it is for man to be glorified. I felt that the revelation of Jesus Christ had yet to be opened up - it is not knowledge about God that it contains, but it is an entering into God - I saw that there was a glorious breaking in of God to be. I felt as Elijah, surrounded with chariots of fire. I saw as it were, the spiritual temple reared, and the Head Stone brought forth with shoutings of grace, grace, unto it. It was a glorious light above the brightness of the sun that shone round about me. I felt that those who were filled with the Spirit could see spiritual things, and feel walking in the midst of them, while those who had not the Spirit could see nothing - so that two shall be in one bed, the one taken and the other left, because the one has the light of God within while the other cannot see the Kingdom of Heaven. I saw the people of God in an awfully dangerous situation, surrounded by nets and entanglements, about to be tried, and many about to be deceived and fall. Now will THE WICKED be revealed, with all power and signs and lying wonders, so that it it were possible the very elect will be deceived - This is the fiery trial which is to try us. - It will be for the purging and purifying of the real members of the body of Jesus; but Oh it will be a fiery trial. Every soul will he shaken to the very centre. The enemy will try to shake in every thing we have believed - but the trial of real faith will be found to honour and praise and glory[/b]. Nothing but what is of God will stand. The stony-ground hearers will be made manifest - the love of many will wax cold.

I frequently said that night, and often since, now shall the awful sight of a false Christ be seen on this earth, and nothing but the living Christ in us can detect this awful attempt of the enemy to deceive - for it is with all deceivableness of unrighteousness he will work - he will have a counterpart for every part of God's truth, and an imitation for every work of the Spirit. [u]The Spirit must and will be poured out on the church, that she may be purified and filled with God - and just in proportion as the Spirit of God works, so will he - when our Lord anoints men with power, so will he. This is particularly the nature of the trial, through which those are to pass who will be counted worthy to stand before the Son of man. There will he outward trial too, but 'tis principally temptation. It is brought on by the outpouring of the Spirit, and will just increase in proportion as the Spirit is poured out. The trial of the Church is from Antichrist. It is by being filled with the Spirit that we shall be kept. I frequently said, Oh be filled with the Spirit - have the light of God in you, that you may detect Satan - be full of eyes within -be clay in the hands of the potter -submit to be filled, filled with God. This will build the temple. It is not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the Lord. This will fit us to enter into the marriage supper of the Lamb. I saw it to be the will of God that all should be filled. But what hindered the real life of God from being received by his people, was their turning from Jesus, who is the way to the Father. They were not entering in by the door. For he is faithful who hath said, by me if any man enters in he shall find pasture. They were bypassing the cross, through which every drop of the Spirit of God flows to us. All power that comes not through the blood of Christ is not of God.

When I say, they are looking from the cross, I feel that there is much in it - they turn from the blood of the Lamb, by which we overcome, and in which our robes are washed and made white. There are low views of God's holiness, and a ceasing to condemn sin in the flesh, and a looking from him who humbled himself, and made himself of no reputation. Oh! it is needed, much needed at present, a leading back to the cross. I saw that night, and often since, that there will be an outpouring of the Spirit on the body, such as has not been, a baptism of fire, that all the dross may be put away. Oh there must and will be such an indwelling of the living God as has not been - the servants of God sealed in their foreheads - great conformity to Jesus - his holy holy image seen in his people - just the bride made comely by his comeliness put upon her. This is what we are at present made to pray much for, that speedily we may all be made ready to meet our Lord in the air - and it will be. Jesus wants his bride. His desire is toward us. He that shall come, will come, and will not tarry. Amen and Amen Even so come Lord Jesus.''

END OF MARAGARET MCDONALD'S VISION.

As usual, the genuine was mixed with the counterfeit, and reading Margaret's revelation I witness to a little of it, but not all. It's really not very different to prophecies that come out of today's church, and you know how reliable THEY can be.

Maragaret McDonald describes a resurrection and catching away of the living saints - but WHERE, dear friends, is there any mention of a pre-trib Rapture in the above? Yet these LIARS will tell you that we got the Pre-Trib Rapture Doctrine FROM THIS VERY GIRL AND THIS VERY VISION!

As the story goes JN Darby met Margaret MacDonald at a Powers Court conference prior to 1840, in order to accuse Darby of affirming or making use of her vision. After reading 1500 pages of Darby's correspondence, covering his life from 1825 to 1881, I never saw the first reference to Ms. MacDonald, and only one unfavorable mention of Irving (MacDonald's "sponsor") - but how do I now prove that this charge is not true?"

Darby "decided" against the revelations of the MacDonalds on the basis that the inspired speakers spoke of the prophetic scriptures of the OT as applicable to the churches of this dispensation. He also heard tongues there, and wrote to Newman of his impressions at the time, that the tongues were not "foreign" but sounded Latin. It seems most unlikely that MacDonald would openly accuse Darby of using her revelation or making use of it, when in fact he did not. He rejected the revelation, the gifts (after early doubts) and also "Irvingism" as it became.

The "pre-trib rapture" idea is NOT found in Lacunza! How anybody can pin the "blame" on him I don't know but if they do they are ignorant of the facts. He's also supposed to be a "jesuit" and supposed to have written the book deliberately to deceive the protestant churches. However, quite the reverse. About Darby seeing Lacunza's book: it has been said that Darby lifted his ideas from this book, but that cannot be so. Bray seems to accept that Darby understood the pre-trib rapture in 1827, and Darby is reported as speaking of the second coming for the saints BEFORE the later appearing on the earth AT THAT TIME (1827) (The Origin of the Pre-Trib Rapture, page 32/33) Bray tries to suggest that, since Lacunza's book was published in the same year, Darby drew the ideas from it. However, we are not talking about modern times, where you can get a book off the Internet the same day, or pop into your local store and order it via computer. Even supposing the book was published on the very day of Irving's foreword being written (dated Jan 17th 1827) there is no way Darby could have seen it by February 1827 when he spoke of the two comings.

I think that its best to write your own opinion, and not to copy and then edit someone elses from the internet.

I have a number of associates that research and write on Biblical subjects just as I do .... so you may think what you like ..... but I use all resources available for conveying information regarding Bible prophecy. I also abreviate and edit copy for simplification. Time constraints are also a factor and this does not permit re-writing articles that have already been presented. I suspect that you are in opposition because you do not like the position presented in this particular article, but that's to bad. We still have freedom of speech and press in the USA and I believe in it ..... you may not. I have permission to do this with the writer of the article.

Good eye Stephen.. What a tangled web is weaved....



You're exactly right Stephen...This is post theory...But also what we see here is an infilling replacing the rapture of the church. That said infilling being the weapon of survival. The Spirit doesn't have to be poured out in one great dunking...but is being poured out even as we speak. God has not held back.

What this women is saying is not to unlike what is constantly being said throughout the body today. It's just that communication allows for and tempts others to speak because of the vehicle allotted them through the age we live in. Her words are more easily dissected today then then. Thanks for posting it. It's a good reference source. I will save it to my files.

I have not really looked into such claims, so I accept your explanation. I need no such information to prove the pre-trib rapture false. The screiptures are quite sufficient. I need not examine the root, only the fruit.

Let me cut and paste and little infor myself in that regard:

Dallas Doctors' Departure Distortions

Walvoord's & Pentecost's Myth
Rumors of the Early Church's "Imminent" Departure have been Greatly Exaggerated
By Tim Warner - Copyright © January 2001

From here: http://www.geocities.com/lasttrumpet_2000/timeline/walv.html

One of the tactics used by some pre-trib authors, to offset the embarrassing dearth of pre-trib belief for the first 1700 years of Christianity, is to simply revise history! One would hope Christians (especially those in high places) would refrain from such tactics. But, alas, it is common among modern pre-tribulationists. Even the big names at Dallas Theological Seminary are no exception. We are not going to judge their motives. We are simply going to expose what has been going on. Whether these men intentionally meant to deceive, whether they were deceived themselves, or whether they were simply repeating what they had read from others, we cannot say. But the result is the same. They have grossly misrepresented historical documents in an attempt to give the impression that pre-tribulationism or its essential elements were taught in the Early Church.

Dr. John Walvoord, former president of Dallas Theological Seminary and author of several pre-trib books, has repeatedly claimed that while the early Christians were post-trib, they were not "futurists." They believed they were already in the tribulation and therefore were looking for an imminent rapture. The implication of this claim is that the early Christians were taught by the Apostles to expect the rapture at any moment. But, they were confused about the tribulation events. Thus, it is easy to discredit and dismiss their strong post-trib stance. Walvoord implied that the Apostles actually taught "pre-trib," since they passed on the idea of "imminence." And, the early Christians were simply too stupid to keep the tribulation events in the future, as they had allegedly been taught by the Apostles.

Dr. Dwight Pentecost, also of Dallas Seminary, made similar statements in his classic pre-trib textbook, Things to Come. Below are two quotes from Walvoord and one from Pentecost that indicate this line of reasoning.

"Unquestionably, the majority view as far as the rapture is concerned is the posttribulational view, namely, that Christ will come for His church in connection with His second coming to the earth. This is the view advocated by the amillenarians and postmillenarians and by some premillenarians. They contend that to divide the rapture from the second coming to the earth by a period of at least seven years is to bifurcate what the Scriptures intend to be a single event.
Posttribulationists who have written on this subject usually attack the pretribulational view, rather than support their own position. Arguments gleaned from their writings in favor of the posttribulational position may be itemized as follows:

1. The argument from history. Posttribulationists appeal to the fact that the early church fathers were posttribulational and conclude that, therefore, the pretribulation position is new and novel. Pretribulationists reply by noting that modern posttribulationism with its doctrine of tribulation first and then the rapture is not what the early church fathers believed at all, for the early church held the any-moment view of the Lord’s return, thinking erroneously that they were already in the great tribulation. The modern form of posttribulationism which places the tribulation still future and to be followed by the rapture is in some respects more recent than pretribulationism as it is taught today." [Walvoord, Future Work of Christ-Part I: The Coming of Christ for His Church — BibSac Vol 123 #489] (Emphasis mine)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"[I]n the early church fathers there was no clear agreement that a specific seven year period as is indicated in Daniel 9:27 had to occur before the Lord could return. Generally speaking, the early church fathers, as well as the Protestant Reformers, tended to identify contemporary events with the events of the Great Tribulation and because of this could look for the imminent return of Christ." [Walvoord, The Rapture Question, p. 51.] (Emphasis mine)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The Early Church lived in the light of the belief in the imminent return of Christ. Their expectation was that Christ might return at any time. Pretribulationism is the only position consistent with this doctrine of imminence. If an argument from silence be followed, the weight of evidence favors the pre-tribulation view." [Pentecost, Things to Come, p. 166]

Dr. Walvoord's claim, that "in the early church fathers there was no clear agreement that a specific seven year period as is indicated in Daniel 9:27 had to occur before the Lord could return" is very misleading. If he means that they were not unanimous in their agreement, well, who is today? There was a dispute in the early Church over whether the Millennial hope was literal. Those inclined toward allegorical interpretation also thought the 70th week was past. These were Clement of Alexandria, Origin, and Julius Africanus. All were affiliated with the North African Alexandrian school, known for its allegorical interpretation, unorthodox views, and combining Christianity with Greek and Eastern philosophy. The other exception was Tertullian of Carthage (North Africa). While Tertullian viewed Daniel 9:27 as past, he was still a "futurist," looking for a literal "tribulation," and the persecution of the Church by Antichrist just prior to the Lord's coming. Unfortunately, Tertullian was involved in the Montanist heresy.

In the orthodox (pre-millennial) writers, there is clear agreement. Irenaeus and Hippolytus taught that the 70th week would be the last seven years of this age in which the two witnesses would prophesy for the first 42 months, the "abomination of desolation" being in the middle, and the Beast would persecute the Church for the last 42 months, then Christ would return (a clear "seven year" tribulation with a post-trib rapture). Other early writers, including Barnabas, Justin, Hermas, Cyprian, Lactantius, and Victorinus, did not refer to Daniel 9:27, and so no specific mention is made of the tribulation being "seven years." But it is clear that they were expecting a future tribulation at the end of the age, and a literal Antichrist who would persecute the Church. These writers saw the Antichrist's reign as 3.5 years. And the ministry of the two witnesses as also 3.5 years. This implies a seven year tribulation.

Walvoord's claim that they thought they were in the tribulation, is equally false. The early Church Fathers consistently placed the Great Tribulation, the Antichrist, and the 2 witnesses in the future. Not one believed the tribulation was in progress. Some thought that the beginning of the tribulation was imminent, expecting the Antichrist to be revealed in their lifetimes. But Walvoord completely misrepresents the Church Fathers when he says they did not understand the 70th week, or thought it was in progress.

Both Walvoord and Pentecost are wrong when they claim the Early Christians expected an "any moment" coming of Christ. The Early Church Fathers looked for intervening events to take place before Christ would return. In the following quotations we will prove decisively that the Dallas Doctors' Departure Distortions have no basis in fact, and totally misrepresented the writings of the Church Fathers.

We will demonstrate that the orthodox Early Church Fathers:
1. Understood the 70th week as future, and would be literally seven years
2. Understood that the tribulation events of Revelation would occur within the 70th week, just prior to Christ's coming
3. Certain intervening events must come before Antichrist would appear. Therefore they did NOT hold to the idea that Jesus' coming was 'imminent.' Rather, they expected the entire sequence of events - tribulation, Antichrist, second coming - to occur soon.

And let's not forget that this is exactly what post-trib / pre-mills teach today, and is the position of The Last Trumpet website. So, Walvoord's claim above, that modern post-tribbers do not hold to the same basic scenario as the Early Church Fathers, is another misrepresentation of the facts.

Irenaeus, while reproving certain Christians for too much speculation, by trying to figure out the name of Antichrist based on the Greek letters for the number 666, wrote that believers should wait for the Roman empire to break up into ten regions ruled by ten kings, then Antichrist would be made known, and Christians could recognize him by the number 666.

Irenaeus: (AD. 120-202)
"Moreover, another danger, by no means trifling, shall overtake those who falsely presume that they know the name of Antichrist. For if these men assume one [number], when this [Antichrist] shall come having another, they will be easily led away by him, as supposing him not to be the expected one, who must be guarded against. These men, therefore, ought to learn [what really is the state of the case], and go back to the true number of the name, that they be not reckoned among false prophets. But, knowing the sure number declared by Scripture, that is, six hundred sixty and six, let them await, in the first place, the division of the kingdom into ten; then, in the next place, when these kings are reigning, and beginning to set their affairs in order, and advance their kingdom, [let them learn] to acknowledge that he who shall come claiming the kingdom for himself, and shall terrify those men of whom we have been speaking, having a name containing the aforesaid number, is truly the abomination of desolation. ... It is therefore more certain, and less hazardous, to await the fulfillment of the prophecy, than to be making surmises, and casting about for any names that may present themselves, inasmuch as many names can be found possessing the number mentioned; and the same question will, after all, remain unsolved. ... But he indicates the number of the name now, that when this man comes we may avoid him, being aware who he is: ... But when this Antichrist shall have devastated all things in this world, he will reign for three years and six months, and sit in the temple at Jerusalem; and then the Lord will come from heaven in the clouds, in the glory of the Father, sending this man and those who follow him into the lake of fire; but bringing in for the righteous the times of the kingdom, that is, the rest, the hallowed seventh day; and restoring to Abraham the promised inheritance, in which kingdom the Lord declared, that many coming from the east and from the west should sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob." [Irenaeus: Against Heresies, Book V, XXX]

Irenaeus instructed believers to wait for the fulfillment of distinct prophetic events that would precede the coming of Christ. The division of the Roman Empire into ten regions, in fulfillment of Daniel's prophecy, and the appearance of Antichrist, must occur before Christians could expect to see the return of Christ. This is not a belief in "imminence" by any stretch of the imagination. Nor is it a belief that they were presently in the tribulation. Here is another quote from Irenaeus.

Irenaeus: (AD. 120-202)
"In a still clearer light has John, in the Apocalypse, indicated to the Lord’s disciples what shall happen in the last times, and concerning the ten kings who shall then arise, among whom the empire which now rules [the earth]shall be partitioned. ... And they shall lay Babylon waste, and burn her with fire, and shall give their kingdom to the beast, and put the Church to flight. After that they shall be destroyed by the coming of our Lord." [Against Heresies, Book V, XXVI]

Notice, Irenaeus used the future tense throughout when speaking of the tribulation events. All of these things were in the future from his perspective.

The orthodox Early Christians also had a clear understanding of the 70th week, that it consisted of the last seven years before Christ's second coming, and that it was entirely future. And, they placed the ministry of the two witnesses, as well as the Antichrist, within the 70th week.

Hippolytus:
"As these things, then, are in the future, and as the ten toes of the image are equivalent to (so many) democracies, and the ten horns of the fourth beast are distributed over ten kingdoms, let us look at the subject a little more closely, and consider these matters as in the clear light of a personal survey. The golden head of the image and the lioness denoted the Babylonians; the shoulders and arms of silver, and the bear, represented the Persians and Medes; the belly and thighs of brass, and the leopard, meant the Greeks, who held the sovereignty from Alexander’s time; the legs of iron, and the beast dreadful and terrible, expressed the Romans, who hold the sovereignty at present; the toes of the feet which were part clay and part iron, and the ten horns, were emblems of the kingdoms that are yet to rise; the other little horn that grows up among them meant the Antichrist in their midst; the stone that smites the earth and brings judgment upon the world was Christ." [Treatise on Christ and Antichrist, 27,28]
"For when Daniel said, “I shall make my covenant for one week,” he indicated seven years; and the one half of the week is for the preaching of the prophets, and for the other half of the week — that is to say, for three years and a half — Antichrist will reign upon the earth. And after this his kingdom and his glory shall be taken away." [Appendix to the Works of Hippolytus, XXV]

Had Dr. Walvoord simply mischaracterized the early Christians, one might suppose that he was just misinformed. But, there are also examples of his quoting excerpts from these documents, and omitting certain statements in the immediate context which show that the early Christians could not possibly have held to imminence! Robert Gundry, in his 1973 book, The Church and the Tribulation [p. 175], illustrated this with the following quote from the first century "Didache" [The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles].

The Didache Chapter XVI
"Watch for your life's sake. Let not your lamps be quenched, nor your loins unloosed; but be ye ready, for ye know not the hour in which the Lord cometh." [Here Walvoord, Stanton, and Pentecost[1], break off the quotation in an endeavor to make the passage establish a belief in imminence by the early Church] "... for the whole time of your faith will not profit you, if ye be not made perfect in the last time.... then shall appear the world-deceiver as Son of God, and shall do signs and wonders.... Then shall the creation of men come into the fire of trial, and many shall be made to stumble and perish; but they that endure in their faith shall be saved from under the curse itself."


1. Walvoord, BibSac, 111:200; Stanton, 221; Pentecost, 169.

For more such revisionist fruit, see this link:

http://www.geocities.com/lasttrumpet_2000/...ne/jeffrey.html

Thanks for that link, Super. David Myer is a true man of God.

God sends a strong delusion to those who don't love the truth but have a fleshly desire to promote their own understand before others. God makes sure they stay in deception if they do this. We mus simply be humble to the scriptures.

2Th 2:11 And for this cause God sendeth them a working of error, that they should believe a lie:

If God gives someone a sleeping pill,,,nothing I do or say will wake them up.

True, we just have to get to the ones who have yet to swallow "the blue pill".

The cultists have already take the blue pill ..... and much more. Let the readers beware of the "manchild" cult . They deny the Lord Himself.

Uh, thats another thread....you started this one, remember?

Stephen, I can't figure you out, you say they deny the Lord, yet they are the very ones trying to yeild completely to him. Also preaching that he has the power to live in our hearts and change us from the vile creators that once we were. It's a wonderful feeling to know that the Lord is working in us to make us like unto himself.

Who do you think they are yielding to? I can tell you it is not Jesus Christ. The entire make-up of the theological concepts put forth are coming from some other source ..... not the scriptures. So I have to say that the movement is rotten to the core, not Biblical at all, ..... another gospel. It is easy to detect the false teachings for those who have a solid and comprehensive understanding of the scriptures. The statements made by the leaders and associated followers conflict with scriptural truths on every turn. Neither do the superficial fronts bearing Christian like images impress me. The Lord said these would come ..... they are here ..... big time. Caution. Deceptions abound with this movement and others today. The list of scriptural precepts against this deceptive behavior would be enormous if posted. All of it is off course and must be exposed for what it is. A hugh mixture of truth and error designed to deceive.

Praise God, we have the Bible and we can check for ourselves what God says, and not depend on the opinions of men.

So, I will repeat, what I always say: People of God, ask the Lord yourselves, and trust in the fact that He WILL answer you according to His promise:

Mat 21:22 And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.

So if you ask for the truth, and you add faith (believe) to that prayer, the Bible tells you that you WILL receive it.
It really works ! He might not answer you that very day, but He will That I promise you.
God does not want His people to walk in darkness and ignorance, He want you to be led into truth by the Holy Spirit.

Joh 14:26 But the Comforter, even the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I said unto you.

Praise God , what a wonderful promise !


C

Assertions without support are just that, assertions. Prove it.



You say? So what. Where is your scripture? Support your accusations, else they are meaningless.




Prove it.



???



None of your hollow accusations have added anything to the discussion.

As far as I can tell, you just disagree. Big deal. But your reasoning seems to be only based upon that, not on anything substantial.

I am here to teach and to please God, not men. If you don't like what is said, then refute it. But these high sounding words lack any love, are thus like a clanging cymbal.

You prove it and you support it. I do not buy your story especially if you are following the same train. Those who feed the crocodial to appease him will be eaten last. I know deception when I see it and these are easly detected.

LOL! If nothing else, at least your entertaining.

You can laugh all you want right into the tribulation that you are seeking as super Christian. If you die before it comes it will not make any difference and your laughing will have been in vain. Good luck.

Good post fundy. I am amazed by those quotes from church fathers over a 1500 years ago. The clarity of the statements is perfect and I feel most vindicated that my beliefs completely match their writings. As I said in a previous post there may have been one or two kooks in the early church who believed in the rapture but I have never heard of one or seen a citation of one. As far as I can tell the earliest descriptions of a pretrib rapture are from Darby in the 1820's.

Your article shows that one of the giants of pretrib theory Walvoord utterly failed to demonstrate an early belief in the rapture. Indeed your article shows that Walvoord was an utter charlatan and his books are simply a pack of lies. One lie piled upon another in typical pretrib mountain of dung style.

"As far as I can tell the earliest descriptions of a pretrib rapture are from Darby in the 1820's."

Really? You need to look further. This idea is a joke. Read Margaret Mcdonald's vision [it is on the net] and tell me that it supports what you call a "pre-trib" rapture. It does just the opposite ..... it is all post-trib. And this vision is the vision that the post-tribulationalist uses to claim that this guy Darby used to present the pre-trib position. Some one has duped you.

I don't even understand what you mean by this. It just does not make sense. What's Mcdonald got to do with it? Did Darby or did Darby not argue for a pretrib rapture. Yes he did and that was in the 1820's. If there was an earlier author who argued for it then let us have it. Please cite quotations with references.

Enough already of these wet paper bag answers Stephen. Come up with something of substance please.

Dig deeper into the contrived idea put forth by the post-tribulational thinking against this Darby guy. The claim is that he got his ideas from Margaret Mcdonald which led him to his pre-tribulational views derived from her vision. As it turns out the entire criticism turns out to be a hoax. Her vision actually supports a post-tribulational view as she has the church going through and subject to the tribulation period just as the post-tribulationalists teach. This whole thing is nonsense just as it is to base one's understanding of the prophetic scriptures on false information suggesting that some guy in the 1800's had the first idea about a different timing of the Lord's "harpazo" action. The whole contrived story is groundless. Her vision is on the net. Read it. Those who made up the hoax missed the intended meaning of the vision, intentionally or unintentionally, and used it to discredit Darby because they wanted to refute his views and anyone else who sees the same thing in the scriptures. The vision ironically supports their own views and this they either know or, do not know .....yet they still use the story in attempting to support their case. This kind of behavior is totally unreliable and exposes their ilk. Do you know who started the game? Check it out and you may learn something else. If one is relying upon this kind of falsfication junk to support one's views they have been duped.

Here is her vision:

Margaret Macdonald has often been either upheld as a visionary, or blamed for "inventing" the pre-tribulational rapture of the Church. This is a very complicated matter, and people tend to take opposite sides without knowing many facts. Margaret Macdonald, a young Christian living in Port Glasgow, Scotland certainly received a revelation which was then written and re-written, circulated and first published in 1840, some ten years later. Not long after her revelation, she wrote down her account of everything and sent hand-written copies of it to a number of Christian leaders. The Morning Watch, a leading British publication, quickly copied some of her distinctive notions. Her revelation was first published in Robert Norton's Memoirs of James & George Macdonald, of Port Glasgow (1840), pp. 171-176. Norton published it again in The Restoration of Apostles and Prophets; In the Catholic Apostolic Church (1861), pp. 15-18. Writers such as Dave MacPherson, ("The Great Rapture Hoax") in an effort to denounce the Rapture teaching as demonic and dangerous, linked Margaret to the young lady known only as "Miss M.M." who had stood up in an Irvingite service in LONDON in 1831 and given a word that purportedly spoke of the rapture BEFORE the Second Coming, at that time a novel idea (but not wholly unheard of, as we shall see.) Thus he and others levelled the charge that she was amongst the demonised false prophets who were causing "disturbances" in Edward Irving's church at the time. However, it is by no means proven that this Miss M.M. is the same person as the Margaret Macdonald who circulated a written revelation she had received WHILE STUDYING THE SCRIPTURES in 1830 in SCOTLAND! But more importantly, while writers like Dave MacPherson read into Margaret's revelation all kinds of pre-trib notions in an attempt to find an occultic origin for the pre-trib Rapture, the teaching quite plainly IS NOT THERE. [What is there, I think you will agree as you read it, is interesting in another way because it prefigures much of today's revivalist teaching.]

Was Margaret a Dispensationalist? Margaret was herself more influenced by the prevailing historicist view of the day than the futurist view that developed in later years. Two portions of the revelation, in particular, seem to indicate a POST-TRIB belief. These portions are marked with emphasis below. It is hard work indeed, using this revelation, to prove that Christians will be taken out before the tribulation or arrival of Antichrist. Historicism - the belief that the prophecies of Revelation are being worked out slowly through history since the time of the Ascension - had become the accepted view by the 19th century. However, is this what the early Church believed? Scholars looking at the teaching of the Apostles and the early Church Fathers have come to the conclusion that historicism was NOT held by them to be the correct interpretation of scripture. They were FUTURISTS and PRE-MILLENNIALISTS.

GENERAL EPISTLE OF BARNABUS ...from the editor's and translators preface: "It has been cited by Clemens, Alexandrinus, Origen, Eusebius, Jerome, and many ancient Fathers. Cotelerius affirms that Origen and Jerome esteemed it genuine and canonical........" "Lost Books of the Bible" World Bible Publishing, copyright 1926 by Alpha House Pages 160-161 Barnabas 13:3-6, 9 (3) And in the beginning of the creation he makes mention of the sabbath. And God made in six days the works of his hands; and he finished them on the seventh day, and rested the seventh day, and sanctified it. (4) Consider, my children, what that signifies, he finished them in six days. The meaning of it is this; that in six thousand years the Lord God will bring all things to an end. (5) For with him one day is as a thousand years; as himself testifieth, saying, Behold this day shall be as a thousand years. Therefore children, in six days, that is, in six thousand years, that all things shall be accomplished. (6) And what is that he saith, And he rested the seventh day: he meaneth this; that when his Son shall come, and abolish the season of the Wicked One, and judge the ungodly; and shall change the sun and the moon and the stars; and he shall gloriously rest in that seventh day. -snip- (9) Lastly he saith unto them; Your new moons and your sabbaths I cannot bear them. Consider what he means by it; the sabbaths, says he, which ye now keep are not acceptable unto me, but those which I have made; when resting from all things I shall begin the eighth day, that is, the beginning of the other world. The Above is the earliest eschatological discourse on record. The Early Church obviously believed in a future 1000 year Millennium.

That is, they believed the words of Revelation, the prophecies of Daniel and the warnings and promises of Jesus to refer to definite, literal, future events, and that the Return of Christ would come BEFORE and LEAD TO a literal thousand-year reign of righteousness and peace on earth. It was only after Emperor Constantine gave his official sanction to the Christian faith that the view developed that Christ was now reigning on earth through the government of the Church, (A-millennialism), and that prophecy was not fulfilled literally but allegorically in and through the Church. However, views varied, and from time to time other opinions on prophecy became popular. People began to look for a greater measure of peace and stability on earth than that provided by a fallen Church. In 1703, Daniel Whitby taught a version of Post-Millennialism, with the Church coming into a golden age of victory and power before the Lord's Return. The Historicist view of prophecy attached ever more fanciful historical interpretations to the prophecies of Revelation which time and again proved false. The majority of Protestant (reformed) teachers up to the 19th century were a-millennial or post-millennial historicists. They did not read prophecy literally, but symbolised everything down to the smallest detail in an attempt to fit events into the Church era. Thus the prophecies of Antichrist were being fulfilled in the Papacy and in successive Popes as an ongoing present evil. However, around the 19th century there was a move towards a Futurist interpretation of prophecy. This did not happen all at once, but was developed in stages through various scholars, some of them within the Roman Catholic system, and some outside.

Ribera Franciscus de Ribera in 1580 wrote a book that was a mixture of a-millennialism, historicism and futurism. He began with the seals opening in the time of Christ, but much of the book of Revelation he interpreted literally at some future date.

Lacunza Manuel de Lacunza was another Catholic who defied the Roman traditional beliefs in order to write (secretly and under threat of discovery) about prophecy from a futurist viewpoint, though many of his beliefs and theories would seem strange to us today. His book "The Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty" (completed in 1790) was written under the pen-name of Ben-Ezra to avoid exposure. It was placed on the Index of Forbidden Books by Rome in 1824.

However, Edward Irving obtained a copy and translated it into English. From his foreword we see that Irving disagreed, profoundly at times, with Lacunza's views. Nevertheless, the futurist interpretation of prophecy was making a welcome come-back from the days of the early Church, and soon more and more Christians studying the scriptures came to the conclusion, as Lacunza had, that much of the endtimes scenario was yet to come.

Lacunza and the Rapture It has often been asserted (in ignorance of Lacunza's book) that this man was the first to propose a pre-trib Rapture. Actually, Lacunza did nothing of the sort. His only reference to the removal of the saints makes it plain that they had endured throughout the Tribulation. However, he suggested that there would be a short time-period, of 45 days, between the "epiphany" (the appearance of the Lord in glory from Heaven) and the "parousia", (the coming to earth). Lacunza suggested that the 45 days would be a time of judgement upon earth where the wrath of God was poured out on God's enemies. The millennial reign of Christ would follow. However, this is a very different doctrine from the invisible catching away and resurrection of the believers before the Tribulation. The pre-trib rapture is not to be found in Lacunza's book.

What follows is the version of Margaret Macdonald's revelation as published in The Restoration of Apostles and Prophets In the Catholic Apostolic Church (1861).

MARGARET'S REVELATION "It was first the awful state of the land that was pressed upon me. I saw the blindness and infatuation of the people to be very great. I felt the cry of Liberty just to be the hiss of the serpent, to drown them in perdition. It was just 'no God.' I repeated the words, Now there is distress of nations, with perplexity, the seas and the waves roaring, men's hearts failing them for fear. Now look out for the sign of the Son of Man. Here I was made to stop and cry out, O it is not known what the sign of the Son of Man is; the people of God think they are waiting, but they know not what it is. I felt this needed to be revealed, and that there was great darkness and error about it; but suddenly what it was burst upon me with a glorious light. I saw it was just the Lord himself descending from Heaven with a shout, just the glorified man, even Jesus; but that all must, as Stephen was, be filled with the Holy Ghost, that they might look up, and see the brightness of the Father's glory. I saw the error to be, that men think that it will be something seen by the natural eye; but 'tis spiritual discernment that is needed, the eye of God in his people. Many passages were revealed, in a light in which I had not before seen them. I repeated, 'Now is the kingdom of Heaven like unto ten virgins, who went forth to meet the Bridegroom, five wise and five foolish; they that were foolish took their lamps, but took no oil with them; but they that were wise took oil in their vessels with their lamps.' 'But be ye not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is; and be not drunk with wine wherein is excess, but be filled with the Spirit.' This was the oil the wise virgins took in their vessels - this is the light to be kept burning - the light of God - that we may discern that which cometh not with observation to the natural eye. Only those who have the light of God within them will see the sign of his appearance. No need to follow them who say, see here, or see there, for his day shall be as the lightning to those in whom the living Christ is. 'Tis Christ in us that will lift us up - he is the light - 'tis only those that are alive in him that will be caught up to meet him in the air. I saw that we must be in the Spirit, that we might see spiritual things. John was in the Spirit, when he saw a throne set in Heaven. But I saw that the glory of the ministration of the Spirit had not been known. I repeated frequently, but the spiritual temple must and shall be reared, and the fullness of Christ be poured into his body, and then shall we be caught up to meet him. Oh none will be counted worthy of this calling but his body, which is the church, and which must be a candlestick all of gold. I often said, Oh the glorious inbreaking of God which is now about to burst on this earth; Oh the glorious temple which is now about to be reared, the bride adorned for her husband; and Oh what a holy, holy bride she must he, to be prepared for such a glorious bridegroom. I said, Now shall the people of God have to do with realities - now shall the glorious mystery of God in our nature be known - now shall it be known what it is for man to be glorified. I felt that the revelation of Jesus Christ had yet to be opened up - it is not knowledge about God that it contains, but it is an entering into God - I saw that there was a glorious breaking in of God to be. I felt as Elijah, surrounded with chariots of fire. I saw as it were, the spiritual temple reared, and the Head Stone brought forth with shoutings of grace, grace, unto it. It was a glorious light above the brightness of the sun that shone round about me. I felt that those who were filled with the Spirit could see spiritual things, and feel walking in the midst of them, while those who had not the Spirit could see nothing - so that two shall be in one bed, the one taken and the other left, because the one has the light of God within while the other cannot see the Kingdom of Heaven. I saw the people of God in an awfully dangerous situation, surrounded by nets and entanglements, about to be tried, and many about to be deceived and fall. Now will THE WICKED be revealed, with all power and signs and lying wonders, so that it it were possible the very elect will be deceived - This is the fiery trial which is to try us. - It will be for the purging and purifying of the real members of the body of Jesus; but Oh it will be a fiery trial. Every soul will he shaken to the very centre. The enemy will try to shake in every thing we have believed - but the trial of real faith will be found to honour and praise and glory[/b]. Nothing but what is of God will stand. The stony-ground hearers will be made manifest - the love of many will wax cold.

I frequently said that night, and often since, now shall the awful sight of a false Christ be seen on this earth, and nothing but the living Christ in us can detect this awful attempt of the enemy to deceive - for it is with all deceivableness of unrighteousness he will work - he will have a counterpart for every part of God's truth, and an imitation for every work of the Spirit. [u]The Spirit must and will be poured out on the church, that she may be purified and filled with God - and just in proportion as the Spirit of God works, so will he - when our Lord anoints men with power, so will he. This is particularly the nature of the trial, through which those are to pass who will be counted worthy to stand before the Son of man. There will he outward trial too, but 'tis principally temptation. It is brought on by the outpouring of the Spirit, and will just increase in proportion as the Spirit is poured out. The trial of the Church is from Antichrist. It is by being filled with the Spirit that we shall be kept. I frequently said, Oh be filled with the Spirit - have the light of God in you, that you may detect Satan - be full of eyes within -be clay in the hands of the potter -submit to be filled, filled with God. This will build the temple. It is not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the Lord. This will fit us to enter into the marriage supper of the Lamb. I saw it to be the will of God that all should be filled. But what hindered the real life of God from being received by his people, was their turning from Jesus, who is the way to the Father. They were not entering in by the door. For he is faithful who hath said, by me if any man enters in he shall find pasture. They were bypassing the cross, through which every drop of the Spirit of God flows to us. All power that comes not through the blood of Christ is not of God.

When I say, they are looking from the cross, I feel that there is much in it - they turn from the blood of the Lamb, by which we overcome, and in which our robes are washed and made white. There are low views of God's holiness, and a ceasing to condemn sin in the flesh, and a looking from him who humbled himself, and made himself of no reputation. Oh! it is needed, much needed at present, a leading back to the cross. I saw that night, and often since, that there will be an outpouring of the Spirit on the body, such as has not been, a baptism of fire, that all the dross may be put away. Oh there must and will be such an indwelling of the living God as has not been - the servants of God sealed in their foreheads - great conformity to Jesus - his holy holy image seen in his people - just the bride made comely by his comeliness put upon her. This is what we are at present made to pray much for, that speedily we may all be made ready to meet our Lord in the air - and it will be. Jesus wants his bride. His desire is toward us. He that shall come, will come, and will not tarry. Amen and Amen Even so come Lord Jesus.''

END OF MARAGARET MCDONALD'S VISION.

As usual, the genuine was mixed with the counterfeit, and reading Margaret's revelation I witness to a little of it, but not all. It's really not very different to prophecies that come out of today's church, and you know how reliable THEY can be.

Maragaret McDonald describes a resurrection and catching away of the living saints - but WHERE, dear friends, is there any mention of a pre-trib Rapture in the above? Yet these LIARS will tell you that we got the Pre-Trib Rapture Doctrine FROM THIS VERY GIRL AND THIS VERY VISION!

As the story goes JN Darby met Margaret MacDonald at a Powers Court conference prior to 1840, in order to accuse Darby of affirming or making use of her vision. After reading 1500 pages of Darby's correspondence, covering his life from 1825 to 1881, I never saw the first reference to Ms. MacDonald, and only one unfavorable mention of Irving (MacDonald's "sponsor") - but how do I now prove that this charge is not true?"

Darby "decided" against the revelations of the MacDonalds on the basis that the inspired speakers spoke of the prophetic scriptures of the OT as applicable to the churches of this dispensation. He also heard tongues there, and wrote to Newman of his impressions at the time, that the tongues were not "foreign" but sounded Latin. It seems most unlikely that MacDonald would openly accuse Darby of using her revelation or making use of it, when in fact he did not. He rejected the revelation, the gifts (after early doubts) and also "Irvingism" as it became.

The "pre-trib rapture" idea is NOT found in Lacunza! How anybody can pin the "blame" on him I don't know but if they do they are ignorant of the facts. He's also supposed to be a "jesuit" and supposed to have written the book deliberately to deceive the protestant churches. However, quite the reverse. About Darby seeing Lacunza's book: it has been said that Darby lifted his ideas from this book, but that cannot be so. Bray seems to accept that Darby understood the pre-trib rapture in 1827, and Darby is reported as speaking of the second coming for the saints BEFORE the later appearing on the earth AT THAT TIME (1827) (The Origin of the Pre-Trib Rapture, page 32/33) Bray tries to suggest that, since Lacunza's book was published in the same year, Darby drew the ideas from it. However, we are not talking about modern times, where you can get a book off the Internet the same day, or pop into your local store and order it via computer. Even supposing the book was published on the very day of Irving's foreword being written (dated Jan 17th 1827) there is no way Darby could have seen it by February 1827 when he spoke of the two comings.

LOLOL!! Thanks "Bro"!