The Book of Revelation is the unveiling mystery of the End Times by our Lord Jesus Christ.It's my earnest desire to present this apologetic studies on "Apocalypse"so much so that even a simple and plain laymen christian can easily understand without so much theological idioms or jargon added.I'm also presenting my reflection on End-Time (Eschatology),Bible Prophecy and the ministry of the Holy Spirit.I also will be posting much needed inspired teaching from many portion of the OT/NT scriptures for the saint to feed upon.Remember,Christ said :"Man cannot live on bread alone,but on every word of God that proceeded from the mouth of God".
"HEAR NOW MY WORD:IF THERE IS A PROPHET AMONG YOU,I THE LORD MAKE MYSELF KNOWN TO HIM IN A VISION,I SPEAK TO HIM IN DREAM" NUMBER 12:6 WELCOME TO THE MINISTRIES OF APOSTLE JOH,THE SEER PROPHET
(Website : www.bspjohseer.com)
FACEBOOK : www.facebook.com/apostlejoh
Email : apostolicseer@Live.com.my
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
RAPTURE DOCTRINAL DEBATE
(There have been a lot of Doctrinal debates regarding the subject on the End Time and the Book of Revelation.One of my blog reader commented that I should "google"subjects such as the "rapture"debate.Debates came about on issue like "Timing of the rapture"occurance and wether there is such a rapture event.Many have attack Pre-Tribulationist viewers on this rapture issue.One of such person is Dave MacPherson,the author of the "rapture Plot".After going through few of his writtings (Pre-Trib rapture,Die hard,x-raying Margaret,Pre-Trib Rapture Dishonesty).I was drawn to a wonderful firm statement by Frank Marotta on Dave's book.I have the privilege to share with all my blog readers and followers of Frank's counter statement to Dave MacPherson's belief.God bless you (Dr.J.Loudin,Apostolic Minister-LAMB Ministries Network)
Dave MacPherson's the Rapture Plot:weighted 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
MacPherson's latest book is The Rapture Plot. It claims to reveal ". . . the most astounding historical revisionism of the past century" (p. 138). The plot is that brethren scholar William Kelly used his periodical The Bible Treasury to conceal that J.N. Darby took the pretribulation rapture from the Irvingites. This was accomplished by alleged misrepresentations of Irvingite prophetic views in Kelly's 1889-1890 articles on the
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
Historical Deficiencies
MacPherson professes to be a historian (p. 233). His work is lacking in historical method. Consider his claim that William Kelly, as editor of Darby's Collected Writings, manipulated them. Regarding Darby's Notes on Revelation (1839) MacPherson writes:
We've previously noted that a chart (listing no artist or date) accompanying this work shows the church in heaven no later than Revelation 4 -additional manipulation and further contradiction of Darby's Revelation 12 basis! (p. 152)
I have inspected a xeroxed copy of the 1839 edition of this work published by Central Tract Depot,
Here are a few of the many deficiencies that I found in The Rapture Plot:
1. MacPherson states that the key symbol of the pretribulation rapture for Margaret Macdonald is the catching up of the two witnesses of Revelation 11 (p. 47-49). If this is true, one wonders if MacPherson has ever read Revelation 11. Before the witnesses are caught up (verse 12), the beast makes war with them and kills them (verse 7). Thus the two witnesses go through tribulation before they are killed, raised and caught up. So if Macdonald's teaching is based on this passage, she is certainly posttribulational! Actually, there is no doubt that the woman who said, "The trial of the Church is from Antichrist" was posttribulational.
Morgan Edwards and the Rapture
2. Recently it has come to light that the 18th century Baptist Morgan Edwards held to a pretribulation rapture (see Pre-Trib Perspectives Sept/Oct 1995). If MacPherson were to regard Morgan Edwards as pretribulational, then both his Macdonald "cover-up" and his Kelly "plot" would be for naught. In The Rapture Plot he recklessly labels Edwards a posttribulational historicist. He writes: ". . . it's obvious that Edwards interpreted these 1260 days [of Revelation 11] as years" (p. 266). This is a blatant falsehood. Edwards wrote in his Two Academical Exercises:
When these witnesses will appear is hard to say; for though their time of prophesying in saccloth [sic] is 1260 days or three years and a half (allowing thirty days to a month) yet they may preach out of sackcloth long before; for the 1260 days refer only to the time that the holy city and the outer court of the temple shall be trodden under the foot of the Gentiles (or Antichrist and his army) viz. 42 months, which make exactly 1260 d
ays, allowing 30 to a month (Rev xi.2). . ." (p. 19)
It is clear from the above that Edwards does not believe the two witnesses had appeared yet. The preaching in sackcloth are 1260 literal days; if they were years (clearly they are not from the context) then they had not as yet begun, which is unlike historicism in any form. The "prophesying out of sackcloth" that Edwards speculates the two witnesses will perform is before Revelation 11:2. Edwards is futurist and literal in his consideration of prophetic time in Revelation 12:7-11 (p. 8), Daniel 8:14 (p. 20), Daniel 12:12,13 (p. 21), Revelation 12:14 (p. 23), and Daniel 12:11 (p. 23).
3. MacPherson writes on p. 267 of The Rapture Plot:
Edwards' basis for holding to a rapture three and a half years before the second advent (and a future millennium) may well have been the Revelation 11 witnesses on whom he focused. This chapter has a period of three and a half days (verses 9, 11) that historicism can view as three and a half years. Since the spirits of these dead witnesses conceivably go to be with Christ during the same days, days preceding the final advent-historicist Edwards could see in this symbol a rapture three and a half years before the same advent.
Compare this with Morgan Edwards:
Another event previous to the Millennium will be the appearing of the son of man in the clouds, coming to raise the dead saints and change the living, and to catch them up to himself, and then withdrawing with them, as observed before. This event will come to pass when Antichrist be arrived at
MacPherson's speculation is without foundation; Edwards distinguishes the saints caught up from the two witnesses, both as to time (the saints caught up three years and a half before the witnesses killed) and identity. Edwards identifies the witnesses as Elijah and the Apostle John (Edwards, pp. 17-19); MacPherson fails to inform his readers of this fact. The catching up of the witnesses is after the three and a half days (verse 12), not before. MacPherson also fails to inform his readers of Morgan Edwards linking the rapture to I Peter 4:17, "For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God" (Edwards, p. 7)
4. MacPherson concludes his section on Morgan Edwards by writing:
Edwards' scheme of a rapture three and a half years before the end of a 1260-year tribulation has the same tiny gap a futurist would have if he were to teach a rapture three and a half days before the end of a 1260-day tribulation! Since such a futurist view would be seen as a posttrib view, Edwards (who had the same small percentage) should be classified as a historicist posttrib! p. 268)
There is a footnote attached which states:
Edwards saw a rapture at the extreme end of the tribulation. The mathematics works out as follows: 3.5 years/1260 years = 0.0027 or 0.27% remaining. That means 99.73% of the tribulation was already past before the rapture. Hardly a pretrib rapture! (p. 268)
As already shown, Edwards did not teach anything like a 1260 year tribulation. Nor was he a historicist. Nor was he "posttrib." But let us apply the same mathematics to some of his alleged pretribulationists. First, consider John Hooper, a contributor to The Morning Watch. MacPherson speaks of "Hooper's pretrib rapture" (p. 200). He also writes of Hooper as "a historicist who saw the final advent in about 1868, Hooper had 37 remaining years where he could fit in between Revelation 16 and Revelation 19..." (p. 200). Let us perform a calculation: 37 years/1260 years = 0.0294 or 2.94% remaining. That means at least 97.06% of the tribulation was already past before the rapture (assuming Christ could come immediately). Hardly a pretribulational rapture! Perhaps Dave MacPherson will tell us at what number between 97.06% and 99.73% complete we transition from pretribulational to posttribulational. Or perhaps MacPherson could admit Hooper as posttribulational. Next, let us consider the woman whom MacPherson labels as the first pretribulationist: Margaret Macdonald. He wrote on p. 49 of The Great Rapture Hoax:
Margaret, however, had
been influenced by historicism and the year-day theory involving 1260 years. . . If only one-tenth of 1260 years remained unfulfilled in her view, she could still believe in a future Antichrist; he would have a total of 126 years in which to do his dirty work.
MacPherson is gracious in allowing 126 years remaining in Margaret's mind. Especially since she identified Robert Owen, a contemporary, as the Antichrist (The Rapture Plot, p. 53). But applying the same mathematical formula that would mean 90% of the tribulation was complete for her! Applying the same method MacPherson does to Morgan Edwards would make her "hardly pretrib!"
5. The importance MacPherson places on The Rapture Plot reveals his spiritual condition. He writes on p. 234:
The real test is ahead. If pretrib promoters ignore or twist this book's documentation, and if their only bottom line is a continuing flow of funds, then I won't be surprised if God views them collectively as an "Achan" (Josh. 7) and allows a national or even international money collapse!
This statement is incredible. Ignoring The Rapture Plot leads to an international money collapse! This extreme notion indicates the mentality under which MacPherson operates.
It is significant that MacPherson is the lone "historian" who has argued a connection between Macdonald and Darby. Considering that there have been numerous historical examinations of both the Irvingites and the Brethren, yet MacPherson stands alone in exposing the "plot," is rather a testimony to polemical bias, not the facts. Those anti-pretribulationists who have adopted MacPherson's revision have done so merely on the basis of his word, not as a result of original research.
Conclusion
Dave MacPherson's The Rapture Plot is a defective work which distorts history. There is no plot. It misrepresents godly men such as Darby and Kelly. It fails to prove the Irvingites were pretribulational in the 1830s. It is completely inaccurate concerning Morgan Edwards' teaching. The Rapture Plot has the same character as MacPherson's previous works. Christians who desire to feed their souls on truth would be well advised to avoid his works. W
Endnotes
1R.A. Huebner, The Truth of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture Recovered (Millington, NJ: Present Truth Publishers, 1976). Huebner, Precious Truths Revived and Defended Through J.N. Darby, Vol. 1 (Morganville, NJ: Present Truth Publishers, 1991). Thomas Ice, "Why the Doctrine of the Pretribulational Rapture Did Not Begin with Margaret Macdonald," Bibliotheca Sacra (Vol. 147; April-June 1990), pp. 155-68. Gerald Stanton, Kept From The Hour, 4th. edition, (Miami Springs, FL: Schoettle Publishing, 1991).
2Columba Graham Flegg, 'Gathered Under Apostles' A Study of the Catholic Apostolic Church (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992), p. 436.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I did some research and found an article on the "Powered by Christ Ministries" site entitled "Frank Marotta's View of Morgan Edwards, Etc." in which historian Dave MacPherson proves that Morgan Edwards, contrary to what pretribs have claimed, was indeed a posttrib historicist. Only historicism - and not preterism or futurism - can view "days" as "years." Edwards viewed Rev. 14 as ALREADY PAST but at the same time said there were still about 200 years remaining in the allotted time of the two witnesses which, if viewed literally, is only a 1260 period. 200 years will fit only into a 1260-YEAR tribulation and not into a 1260-day tribulation. Edwards also taught that the two beasts of Rev. 13 has ALREADY been in existence for hundreds of years, and that in his view the tribulation was ALREADY about 97 percent fulfilled! The entire text of Morgan Edwards' paper is on the web and the good Brother might want to check it out and re-examine what he has stated. And he might want to Google "Scholars Weigh My Research" to see analyses of Mac's research coming from leading evangelical scholars, none of whom have had an axe to grind either for or against a pretrib rapture. God bless.
ReplyDeleteCorrection: I should have said a "1260-day period" just before I said "200 years will fit only into..." Sorry.
ReplyDeleteThank you MaryLee for taking your time writing your comment which you base on yr research of Dave MacPherson's view on Morgan Edwards.I believe the best person to answer Morgan Edwards's view on wether he was a posttrib historist or a Pre-Tribulationist is Rev.Morgan Edwards himself!.I quote to you a portion of his own writting from his own 57 pages book titled:"Two Academical Exercises on Subjects Bearing the following Titles; Millennium, Last-Novelties"Published in Philadelphia(1788).
ReplyDeleteIn pages 7 of his book (Spelling of his quote being modernize)I quote his statement:"II. The distance between the first and second resurrection will be somewhat more than a thousand years.I say, somewhat more --; because the dead saints will be raised, and the living changed at Christ's "appearing in the air" (I Thes. iv. 17); and this will be about three years and a half before the millennium,as we shall see hereafter: but will he and they abide in the air all that time? No: they will ascend to paradise, or to some one of those many "mansions in the father's house" (John xiv. 2), and so disappear during the foresaid period of time. The design of this retreat and disappearing will be to judge the risen and changed saints; for "now the time is come that judgment must begin," and that will be "at the house of God" (I Pet. iv. 17)
Sis.Mary,eventhough Morgan Edward miss some 3.5 years of the 7 years tribulation gap,yet his statement is clearly indicates his belief on the pre-trib view.Notice that Edwards associated the first resurection with the rapture(1Thess4:17)which he was convince to occur 3.5years before Christ's second coming prior to the Millennium kingdom.He also associates the meeting of the saints with Christ in the air and returning to the Father's house with John 14:2,just like any modern pre-Tribulationist does.
I hope Edwards own writings will somehow clear your doubts over his stand as a Pre-Trib viewer,rather than taking a third party reports such as Dave MacPherson.I leave you with Morgan Edwards statement from his same book,page 24,25 which he wrote :
"8. The last event, and the event that will usher in the millennium, will be, the coming of Christ from paradise to earth, with all the saints he had taken up thither (about three years and a half before) . . . (p. 24)
millions and millions of saints will have been on earth from the days of the first Adam, to the coming of the second Adam. All these will Christ bring with him. The place where they will alight is the "mount of Olives, which is before Jerusalem on the east." Zech. xiv, 4. (p. 25)
Sis.Mary, kindly note that Edward clearly separates the rapture and the second coming in this statement.God bless you and keep up the good work to get more findings.The Holy Spirit will guide you into all truth.Maranatha!
Dr. loudin - Since 97 percent of the tribulation was already PAST in Edwards' view, his rapture view at the very most was a POSTTRIB HISTORICIST view with a strange, repetitive gap following his rapture/second advent. Yes, he tied the rapture to the second advent. On pp. 21-22 Edwards wrote that the "signs of his coming in the heavens will be 'the trump of God [I Thess. 4:16], vapour and smoke, which will darken the sun and moon [Acts 2:19-20]." No pretrib teacher I know of will ever tie together the rapture and the sun/moon darkening! Edwards saw Antichrist's reign before the rapture/second advent - but he also saw a portion of that reign AFTER the rapture/advent which is why is tutor advised Edwards to correct the many errors in his essay!
ReplyDeleteMacPherson contacted the co-authors of the book on Edwards that inspired the claim for Edwards. Neither one of those two authors were able to see pretrib in what Edwards wrote. If they weren't able to find pretrib in Edwards' essay, how can Bray or Ice or any one else presume to think they are smarter than the authors of that modern book about Edwards?
Jeffrey, Ice and some others have done the same thing with the claim for Pseudo-Ephraem. They have covered up the fact that Dr. Paul Alexander, whose book inspired the P-E claim, was not able to find even a smidgen of pretrib in P-E! In fact, when Alexander listed all of P-E's endtime events in chronological order (in both textual and outline form), we learn that P-E saw only one final coming - the second advent to earth which DID NOT include a separate, prior rapture! Do you really think Jeffrey and Ice know more about Pseudo-Ephraem than the world famous Pseudo-Ephraem expert knows about him?
For the sake of argument, let's suppose that a few teachers did teach or at least hint at a pretrib rapture throughout the church age. (Just because some used the word "rapture" doesn't prove pretrib because there were many posttrib teachers before 1830 who used it in connection with a posttrib coming!) Even if some before 1830 did seem to hint at a pretrib coming, is it safer to side with them than with the overwhelming majority who were non-pretrib?
Thanks for your interest. Let's be ready for whatever happens first, okay?
MaryLee
Bless you MaryLee.Thank you again with your good comments.Since the exact timing of the rapture event was not indicated,therefore all these three viewers (Pre-Trib,Mid-Trib,Post-Trib)will keep on debating to make up their point.I'm not dogmatic about this matter,hence I'll keep an open mind over their Theology.However I will still put forth my belief as a PPT viewer as this is the measure of my faith on rapture subject base on my scriptural research.(So please keep of reading my post as I'll be posting many more!)
ReplyDeleteAs I've stated previously,Eventhough Edward miss 3.5 years of 7 tribulation gap,yet his statement is clearly indicates his Pre-Trib belief.Due to his 3.5 year missing gap,I'm not surprise to read in his writing (page 22) as if he filled the "gap"by a mixer the rapture event and the opening of the six seal(Rev 6:12-17) event of"vapour of smoke,dark sun and moon"which indicate an event that occurs during the tribulation.Still,his rapture's belief is to occur before the coming of our Lord to earth.Edwards miss the 7 years tribulation by 3.5 years gap but he still believed in the rapture,an event that is to occur before Christ's coming to reign on earth.This is the basic Pre-Trib belief in nature.
Pseudo-Ephraim's pre-Trib views is another argumental issue among the Pre-Trib and Post-Tribulationists.Eventhough I've done my research on P-E writings but I think I won't prolong our argument on this matter,as I'm focusing my writings to exegete scriptures from the Book of Revelation and other related subject.Following the majority is every scholar's agenda to prove their stand.This is one of the reason why Macpherson,Ice,Jeffrey or Lahaye use early Escathological writers to back-up their theories.I prefer to get back to the Bible to search for such truth with the leading of the Holy Spirit and not to be dogmatic about it.With my utmost respect to these scholars,I will use their materials as my tools because they did spark some biblical truth with their writings.I give my due respect to all of them.
I hope you will read through all my posting(Blog achives)right from the begining as all my postings are closely link like reading a book and you won't be able to grasp my opinions,
views or interpretation if just by picking up one topic alone.God bless you and I really appreciate your mindfull opinion.Immanuel until Maranatha
Pretribbers should be happy to learn about the missing lines in Margaret Macdonald's 1830 pretrib rapture revelation. Read "Pretrib Rapture's Missing Lines" in the March 27th "Our Daily Bread" blog owned by Joe Ortiz.
ReplyDeleteBless your good heart Sis.Mary for your fresh info.I'll check on it.Shalom
ReplyDelete