Gifts are received via TWT Ministries.
NOT a non profit organization!
The Pretribulation Rapture:
What if it isn't true?
by C. H. Fisher
| Previous | Contents | Next |
Chapter 3 - A Pre-Tribulation Rapture: The History
When you research the history of Pre-tribulation Rapture, you will find that it is part of an entirely new belief system termed dispensationalism. Although I will be dealing with dispensationalism in detail in the following chapter, I must give a brief explanation here in order to reveal the history of PTR.
Dispensationalism has one basic premise
that turns it away from the teaching of the
early Church, and the Bible for that
matter. It is best described by a
dispensationalist. Read what Dr. Charles
Ryrie writes:
''A dispensationalist keeps Israel and the Church distinct . . . a man who fails to distinguish Israel and the Church will inevitably not hold to dispensational distinctions.'' (1)
The idea of a pretribulation rapture is possible, because dispensationalists keep the church and Israel separate in eschatology. Thus, they design an event that moves the Church out of the world so that God can deal only with Israel. Many Scriptures written to the Church are interpreted to be meant for Israel. With this faulty method of interpretation, the dispensationalist can cast off onto the Jewish people all the Scriptures that he does not want to accept.
In order to develop a time period in their belief system when God will deal with the nation of Israel, dispensationalists teach that the Church will be raptured from the earth a split second before the Tribulation Period begins. This timing of this rapture is defined by the word pretribulation, obviously an appropriate term to describe the vent. The pretribulation rapture is then followed by an intense seven year tribulation as God deals with the Jewish people in an attempt to get them to turn to Him. At the conclusion of the Tribulation Period, Jesus comes for the third time, another rapture takes place, and the Millennium begins. Most dispensationalists do not believe that the second coming of Christ counted as an actual coming because He never actually touches the ground. They claim some unwritten rule that in order for His coming to qualify as a true coming, He has to touch the earth. Of course, there is no such rule in the Scriptures. Like many of the other rules that dispensationalism invent, this is one of the rules that seem to pop up when the finer points of their doctrine is called into question by discerning people.
Where did this doctrine come from? Who are the people promoting it? In spite of recent attempts to attribute the pretribulation rapture doctrine to the early church by several leading proponents, the doctrine had no mention in any valid historical document before the 19th century. If anyone held the belief before then, it is certain that it was most certainly not received by any detectable percentage of Christendom. The doctrine of the Pretribulation Rapture of the Church is a new doctrine that surfaced late in the 19th century and gained popularity in America at the beginning of the 20th century. An Anglican minister by the name of J. N. Darby came up with the idea of dispensationalism while studying the Book of Revelation during a time of recovery after falling from his horse. He eventually added the idea of the "any-moment secret rapture," which is the pretribulation rapture. A little over a half a century later, C. I. Scofield took a fancy to the doctrine and thought up the plan for a reference Bible that would explain the complicated structure of dispensationalism to the masses. He constructed his reference Bible to include Darby's dispensational error, which included the doctrine of Pretribulation Rapture. The Scofield Reference Bible was introduced into the American church during the turn of the 20th century. It was first met with great resistance, and caused much confusion and conflict among professing Christians. Throughout time, it has gradually become accepted and defended by many as a true, Biblical doctrine.
The most visible people who promote it today are mainly from the Baptist denominations. Although the Assemblies of God and other Pentecostal organizations, including most Charismatic groups, also promote dispensationalism, the best-known individual promoters are Baptists. The modern instigator of what has become known as "newspaper exegesis" is a man by the name of Hal Lindsey. Hal Lindsey's book, "The Late, Great Planet Earth" has sold millions of copies and opened up a whole new field of "ministry." The "ministry" is called Prophecy Teaching and it is the most exciting and entertaining enterprise that Christianity has ever seen. The pretribulation rapture and subsequent seven-year tribulation are the twin center pieces of this sensational flood of material. Today, books, tapes and videos that flow out of this dispensationalist industry are eagerly purchased by the faithful hordes who are hungry for more scintillating information. The current stars in this most popular "ministry" are Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins, two writers who teamed up to produce several best sellers. The books hit the New York Times best seller list and the two authors appear on top rated talk shows including Larry King Live. The Pre-tribulation Rapture has become, as one writer for MSNBC said when describing LaHaye and Jenkin's fictional books about the rapture, a "cottage industry." Millions are being made by people who have sensationalized a false doctrine and caused a great number of people needing frequent "fixes" of rapture information to become addicted to it. It is as if an industry of confusion has been created, as these men present an endless stream of exciting answers that come in all shapes, colors, and sizes.
For the purpose of understanding how dispensationalism came to be the popular doctrine that it is today, I will present a brief account of the trail from Darby to Scofield. Then we will follow the trail from Lindsey to the current propagators today. First, let us examine the life of J.N. Darby and how he came to form the doctrine of dispensationalism, the doctrine that eventually led to the idea of Pre-tribulation Rapture.
J. Nelson Darby: The Father of Dispensationalism
Darby is called by many the "father of modern dispensational theology." As John F. Walvoord, former president of Dallas Theological Seminary, has said, "Much of the Truth promulgated by fundamental Christians today had its rebirth in the movement known as the 'Plymouth Brethren."(2)
This piece comes from Holman's Bible Dictionary:
Darby set forth the idea that God has set up seven time periods, called dispensations, for His work among human beings. The seventh, or last dispensation will be the millennial reign of Christ (Rev. 20). In each dispensation, people are tested in reference to the obedience of God's will according to a specific revelation of that will. Darby visited the United States on several occasions and won many advocates to his theology. However, C. I. Scofield popularized the dispensational system in his study Bible of 1909. He set forth seven dispensations in God's dealing with human beings.
1. Innocency (Gen. 1:28)- the period of time in the Garden of Eden.
2. Conscience (Gen. 3:23)- the awakening of human conscience and the expulsion from the garden.
3. Human Government (Gen. 8:20)- the new covenant made with Noah, bringing about human government.
4. Promise (Gen. 12:1)- the new covenant made with Abraham.
5. Law (Ex. 19:8)- the period of acceptance of the Jewish law.
6. Grace (John 1:17)- begins with the death and resurrection of Jesus.
7. Kingdom (Eph. 1:10)- constitutes the final rule of Christ.
Program of Eschatology
Beyond the seven dispensations, the Darby movement had a definite program of eschatology in five steps.
1. A two-stage coming of Christ: rapture and parousia.
2. Seven years of tribulation on earth for those not raptured: The last three-and-a-half years will be the time of the Antichrist. One hundred forty-four thousand Jews will accept Christ and become evangelists.
3. Christ's return with the church, the conclusion of the Battle of Armageddon, and the rule of Christ and the church for a thousand years.
4. Belief in an unconditional covenant with Israel: Thus, God is working through Israel and the Church. In the millennium, the nation of Israel will be restored.
5. The literal fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy.
Some of the more popular advocates of dispensationalism have been C. H. MacKintosh, W. E. Blackstone, H. A. Ironside, and A. C. Gaebelein. More recently, Hal Lindsey has made the system a best seller in his book The Late Great Planet Earth. The Book of Revelation has become a key book in the dispensational approach. Dispensationalists see the rapture taking place in Revelation 4:1, the rest of the book (chs. 4-18) dealing with the seven years of tribulation. Thus, the book has very little significance for Christians who will not be on earth during that time. (3)
John Nelson Darby was from a prosperous Irish family, and was educated briefly as a lawyer. Darby graduated from Trinity College Dublin in 1819 at the age of eighteen. In 1825, he received ordination as deacon in the Church of England. Not long after, he accepted a parish in the county of Wicklow. He was a recognized as leader and early teacher in the beginning of the Brethren movement and throughout his ministry.
The Brethren movement began in Dublin about 1825, during the rise of millenarianism. A small group of men became dissatisfied with what they considered apostate conditions in the established churches. They began to meet for prayer and fellowship, and others soon joined the fellowship, causing associated groups to spring up everywhere. Though the movement had its beginning at Dublin, it was Plymouth, England that became the center of their vast literature outreach. Henceforth, the name Plymouth Brethren became the name of the movement. Early leaders of the Brethren movement had many differences and divisions among themselves in the early days and ever after.
Darby is presented by men such as Larry Crutchfield as being a gentle, kind, individual who was incredibly spiritual and devoted to the Scriptures.
"Darby was kind and humble in nature, and his compassion and generosity towards the poor was without bounds." (4)
However, this is not exactly true. In fact, many of Crutchfield's comments about the nature of Darby do not align with the historical facts. Crutchfield quotes from Earnest Sandeen, yet seems to ignore what Sandeen writes about Darby's nature. It is not my intent to demonize either Darby or Scofield, but to let the facts speak for themselves. Sandeen writes this:
"Perhaps he should be described as a petty tyrant, for he was most tyrannical about petty things. Unlike Wesley, he often demonstrated as much zeal in destroying the work of his own building, as he did in its first construction." (5)
Although I have no doubt that Darby was at times kind, maybe even the majority of the time, I believe that there were many times in which he was not so kind. Someone once said, "The measure of your Christianity is not how well you get along when you agree, but how well you get along when you disagree." Those who disagreed with Darby, especially those who disagreed with his developing doctrine of dispensationalism, were treated with extreme harshness, even to the point of viciousness. Darby ruled the Plymouth Brethren with the resolute will of an overlord. (6)
Crutchfield writes,
"Kindly in disposition and humble in spirit though Darby was, his absolute devotion to the Word of God and demand for unflinching fidelity to its truth, as he understood it (emphasis mine), made him ready prey for controversy. His limitless patience with the honest ignorance of the poor and unlearned was legendary. But so was his wrath against those among the well educated who played fast and loose with the truth of the gospel of Christ." (7)
Again, this is not exactly accurate concerning Darby's disposition, unless one believes that men such as George Müller "played fast and loose with the truth of the gospel of Christ." At one point, Darby's temper flared to the extent that he excommunicated the famous George Müller and the whole Brethren congregation in Bristol. He apparently called Müller a liar and alienated him over a difference of opinion. (8)
What caused Darby's outburst of anger toward Müller? Maybe it was Müller's statements such as the following:
"My brother, I am a constant reader of my Bible, and I soon found that what I was taught to believe (by Darby's Doctrine) did not always agree with what my Bible said. I came to see that I must either part company with John Darby, or my precious Bible, and I chose to cling to my Bible and part from Mr. Darby." (9)
In the words of Henry Craik and James C. Carson, two men who observed the whole affair, Darby was trying to force dispensationalism on the Plymouth Brethren by lashing out in venomous anger at anyone who disagreed with him.
"Oh, what a terrible thing is party spirit! Am I not justified in discarding and avoiding it? The truth is, Brethrenism as such, is broken to pieces. By pretending to be wiser, holier, more spiritual, more enlightened, than all other Christians; by rash and unprofitable intrusions into things not revealed; by making mysticism and eccentricity the test of spiritual life and depth; ... by grossly offensive familiarity of speaking of such sacred matters as the presence and teaching of the Holy Ghost; and by a sectarianism all the more inexcusable, that it was in the avoidance of sectarianism that Brethrenism originated; by these and similar errors, the great Scriptural principles of church communion have been marred and disfigured." (10)
The Bristol leaders shared neither his [Darby's] militant anti-clericalism, nor his dramatic expectations concerning the Second Advent. On the contrary, they were glad to recognize the gifts of God shown by men with whom they agreed concerning church order and position. On the second matter, despite their expectations as to the Second Advent, the intense apocalyptic note was almost entirely absent from their teaching. They certainly held the probability of the near return of Christ, but they most definitely did not make that expectation a foundation of their teaching. (11)
Darby often clashed with fellow Plymouth Brethren, once with his friend Benjamin Wills Newton, whom he accused of trying to control the fledgling movement. Consider this account by Sandeen:
"Although there was a good deal of truth in these charges, the vindictive and violent manner in which they were brought and the persistence with which they were pursued (Newton being hounded by them until his death in 1899) create an impression that Darby was unable to tolerate rivals to his leadership. The blowup at Plymouth appears to have been inevitable once Darby discovered that he could not dominate Newton or convert him to his own theology." (12)
Sandeen also writes:
"--the ensuing turmoil almost destroyed the struggling young sect and left a legacy of bitterness which remained to blight the experience of Plymouth Brethren for generations." (13)
I must say here that if there is such a thing as a spirit being transferred with a doctrine, Darby's ill-temper and iron-fisted attitude toward those who disagreed with him certainly passed on with his doctrine. There are few issues which are as likely to cause tempers to flare as quickly the timing of the Rapture. Pretribbers will resort to actions normally reserved for wicked people or those who commit vile heresies upon the Body of Christ. There has been a lot of pain inflicted on people who disagree with Pretribulation Rapture position and it is still going on today. I do not mind bombastic writing, but assassinating reputations and ministries with charges of slander and committing malicious activities against them is quite another thing all together. Those who have the greater guilt in these matters are the denominational leaders.
Margaret McDonald
Where did J. N. Darby get his doctrine of dispensationalism and the any-moment secret rapture? He was alleged to have been inspired somewhat by a female Pentecostal preacher in Scotland by the name of Margaret McDonald. In this piece from Holman's Bible Dictionary, Darby's idea of a secret rapture is assigned to Margaret McDonald.
The Role of J.N. Darby
" The idea of a two-stage return of the Lord, unheard of before 1830, became the platform for the movement called 'dispensationalism.' Ms. McDonald's pastor, J. N. Darby (1800-1882), picked up on her idea and began to make use of it in his sermons. Darby was responsible for developing the two-stage coming of Christ into a fully developed eschatology, or theology. He had been an Anglican clergyman until 1827 when he left the church to join the Plymouth Brethren." (14)
Although there were many questions as to whether McDonald's vision contained references to a pre-tribulation rapture, it was certain that she was in the same circle as Darby. I have not discovered anything in my research that indicates that McDonald was ever in Darby's congregation. Also, I have read McDonald's vision and do not see a pretribulation rapture spelled out. However, if dispensationalists can find such a doctrine in the Bible, I suppose I could do the same with McDonald's vision, since it contains several vague references that might be construed to be a pretribulation rapture. Although there may be another vision, I am not aware of it. Here is the McDonald vision in totality that is being circulated as the one Darby is accused of getting his theory of a secret rapture from.
"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. 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.
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.''
Manuel Lacunza
Margaret McDonald and her family were involved
in the congregation of Edward Irving, rather than
in Darby's church. She may have been inspired by
the writings of a Spanish Jesuit Priest Manuel
Lacunza since Irving translated Lucunza's book into
English and taught some of the doctrine in it.
Manuel Lacunza was banished from Chile in 1767 with
other Jesuits. Shortly after, he fancied himself to
be a converted Jew and changed his name to Rabbi
Ben Ezra. Lacunza began writing a book entitled
"The Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty" under
the name of Ben Ezra, and finished the book about
1791. In his book, Lacunza taught the that Jesus
would return two times for the Church. His first
return would be to get His Church out of the world
so that God the Father could pour out His wrath.
This may be the portion from which came the idea of
a pretribulation rapture. Lacunza died before the
book was published in Spanish about the year 1812.
The book never became very popular. In fact, it
would probably have slipped into oblivion as so
many unpopular books have done throughout the
years. However, Lacunza's book somehow made its way
to England, where Edward Irving found it in the
library of the Archbishop of Canterbury in
London.
Edward Irving
Edward Irving was a powerfully charismatic
preacher who preached in the Caledonian Chapel in
London. The rather small chapel was filled with
crowds that included the elite of society. His
greatest weakness was that "he was a ship without a
keel, swung around in each new breeze until at last
he was blown over." (15) Sandeen describes the
impetuous disposition of Irving in the following
quote:
"Irving loved the mysterious -- "loved to see and idea looming through the mist." And once captured by such an idea, once seized by its mystery, he would become its slave, never asking what contradictions of complications might follow."(16)
Irving was enamored by prophetic studies, and began meeting with James Hatley Frere every week to discuss prophecy. It was not long afterward that Irving was the most charismatic spokesman for millenarianism. Irving reportedly read Lacunza's book and became fascinated by the doctrine of any-moment secret rapture. He translated it into English, and Lucunza's book once destined for extinction was again published in London in 1827.
Not long after reading Lacunza's book, Irving began to preach the secret rapture of the saints, claiming that he heard a voice from heaven commanding him to do so. Some of his meetings during 1828 in Scotland brought crowds of approximately10,000 people. Irving's church in London was famous for his prophetic declarations and for attracting famous, influential people of society. The building seated one thousand people, and was filled to capacity each week. The many prophetic declarations that Jesus was coming soon that produced great excitement. A person might see from this a parallel to the exciting Charismatic and Pentecostal churches today who revel in prophesies and sensationalism and draw huge crowds.
Also during that time, Irving started conducting Bible conferences and studies throughout Scotland on any-moment secret rapture, using Lacunza's book. It was during this time that J. N. Darby and Irving began to have a close relationship. Although Darby's doctrine of dispensationalism included the idea of a pre-tribulation secret rapture, I am prone to believe that he may have gotten the idea from the Irving's Lacunza-influenced version of the rapture.
Irving was conducting a series of meetings during this time in the castle of Lady Powerscourt for the study of Bible prophecy, especially any-moment secret rapture. A great many Irvingite ministers attended, as well as ministers from others religious organizations. J.N. Darby and the other Brethren leaders were invited and attended these meetings. It was at these series of meetings that he was, no doubt, introduced to Irving's teaching of the Rapture and interpretation of prophecy, and most likely to Lacunza's book. Although I have not yet discovered if Darby had ever read the book or in any way agreed with it, there certainly is documentation that he knew and studied with Irving and the Irvingites.
Although Irving was the most popular preacher that first began teaching and preaching about the rapture, it was Darby who developed the idea into Pre-tribulation Rapture and blended it into his prophetic teaching of dispensationalism. Fueled by the atmosphere of millenarianism, Darby began teaching his theory on the Book of Revelation at Powerscourt. While Irving was a historian,
Darby taught a futurist interpretation of eschatology. His dispensational theory was beginning to develop into a solid outline that could be grasped and taught by others. In 1833, he taught the doctrine of a secret rapture at Powerscourt for the first time in public.
Darbyite Dispensationalism Invades America
At the same time that millenarianism was invading America with an apocalyptic fervor, William Miller and Alexander Cambell were at the forefront of millenarianism, with the Millerites the largest and most influential group. However, he set a date for the Second Advent that caused many millenarians to turn against him. America was ripe for a new view with more balance and dependability.
Darby visited the United States approximately seven times to teach and preach his doctrine of dispensationalism. He found the condition of the American church deplorable to his taste, and held many small meetings to discuss and teach dispensationalism with church leaders. Darby insisted that those who believed his views abandon their church and join the Plymouth Brethren. Most of Darby's converts came from Baptist and Presbyterian churches, prompting this critique of the Plymouth Brethren in the Princeton Review:
"The aim of the Brethren is to 'gather churches out of churches:' to disintegrate all existing bodies by opening a door in each, not for the exit of the faithless and false-hearted, but of the pious and the good; and, accordingly, they prowl unceasingly round all our churches, seeking to reap where they have not sown, and leaving to the denominations generally the exclusive privilege of evangelizing the masses." (17)
The diatribe appears to be founded when you read these words by Earnest Sandeen quoting from The Letters of J. N. Darby.
"Throughout his ministry in the United States, Darby had been frustrated by his inability to arouse more dissatisfaction among Americans with their denominations, and during his last few years in America he lamented like Jeremiah: 'Eminent ministers preach the Lord's coming, the ruin of the Church, liberty of ministry, and avowedly from brethren book's, and stay where they are, and there is a general deadening of conscience.' "
Dr. James Brooks and the Niagra Bible Conferences
About 1864-65, J.N. Darby visited the 16th and Walnut Avenue Presbyterian Church in St. Louis, Missouri, on two occasions. This church became the principal center of dispensationalism in America. The pastor, Dr. James H. Brooks, became Darby's most prominent supporter, and has been called "the father of dispensationalism in America."
Dr. Brooks conducted many Bible studies with the young men in his church, C. I. Scofield being his most famous student. Yet it was his involvement in the Niagra Bible Conference that would prove important to the diffusion of dispensationalism in America. C. I. Scofield later served as head of the conference, and there birthed the idea of a study Bible that would help spread Darbyite dispensationalism.
The Niagra Bible Conference began as the Believer's Meeting for Bible Study, but soon turned into the main spring from whence Darbyite dispensationalism would flow. The Niagra Bible Conference under his controlling influence became the center of millenarianism under the controlling influence of its founder, James Brookes. Scofield served as the head of the Niagra Bible Conference as well. Non-millenarians were permitted to attend the conferences, but from 1878 onward they were not permitted to speak. Most of the leading millenarians in America, as well as many Brethren ministers, attended the conferences. D. L. Moody was also an attendee, and was highly influenced by the Brethren style of preaching. Brookes made the Niagra Bible Conference the premier headquarters for Darbyite Dispensationalism by making sure that all the speakers favored the theory. With the exception of the Moody Bible Institute and later Lewis Chafer's Dallas Theological Seminary, the Niagra Bible Conference was the leading force in making PTR the accepted doctrine that it is today.
The atmosphere of the Niagara Bible Conference was personality-driven by millenarian apocalyptic fever from the sensational views of Darby. It served to further erode the theological underpinnings of Christian eschatology and helped to replace them with revelations and speculations. The factors of probable self-importance and exciting visibility only served to give the participants a false sense of pioneering a new work of God, or as Scofield put it, "this new beginning and new testimony." It was in this enticing limelight that Scofield made his biggest steps toward prominence. He envisioned a Bible with his name on it that included his reference notes concerning Darby's pseudo-eschatology. He would have to break a time-honored policy of all the popular Bible societies, whose rules had always been, "Without Note or Comment." But breaking the rules to get ahead was nothing new to Scofield, as we will see in the next section. Brazenly, he went about corrupting the Bible, shading the meaning of the Scriptures, even defying some of them, and ignoring the curse upon those who commit such accursed deeds.
"For I testify to everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds to these things, God will add to him the plagues that are written in this book; {19} and if anyone takes away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part from the Book of Life, from the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." (Rev. 22:18-19 NKJV)
The result was the notorious Scofield Reference Bible, its successive revisions continually plaguing Christianity to this day.
Cyrus Ingerson Scofield
The Scofield Reference Bible is widely referred to as the Bible that validated and promoted dispensationalism to the infamous stature that it enjoys today in the professing Church. Millions of Christians have either wittingly or unwittingly developed their eschatology from reading Scofield's reference notes. His successor, Lewis Sperry Chafer, founded the Dallas Theological Seminary, which has, in turn, trained thousands of individuals in the false doctrine of dispensationalism and unleashed them on the world. Who is C. I. Scofield, and how does his life compare to Joseph Smith and other men who purport to having received dubious gnosis from God? Cyrus Ingerson Scofield was a man with a keen, analytical mind and an above average intelligence. In my opinion, from all the information that I have read about him, he was a very personable, highly charismatic individual who made friends easily, especially friends in high places. This explains how he could be admitted to the Lotus Club in New York, which was restricted to "a social intercourse between journalists, artists, musicians, friends of literature, science, fine arts, etc." He was admitted into this club by notorious criminal lawyer Samuel Untermeier, although he had no credentials. This also explains how he could be elected twice to the Kansas legislature (1871 and 1872) with the help of some powerful men. President Grant appointed him as the United States District Attorney of Kansas on June 9, 1873. He affirmed in the oath of office that he had never voluntarily born arms against the United States, although he had fought in the Confederate Army. He resigned six months later on December 20, 1873, amid charges and counter-charges of political corruption. He and a friend were charged with trying to blackmail the railroads out of some money. Thus, Scofield's political career ended here.
Scofield's biographer, Turnbull, skips over the period of 1873 to 1879, the time in which Scofield was involved in the worst of his shenanigans, with nothing more than a reference to Scofield's habit of drinking. However, if Joseph Canfield is correct in his information, Scofield appeared to be nothing more than a highly-skilled con man who had allegedly defrauded a number of his friends and fellow Christians, not to mention his mother-in-law, whom he supposedly swindled out of her life savings of $1300.00. One of his financial scams was so serious that he was convicted of forgery and sentenced to 6 months in the St. Louis, Missouri, jail. He abandoned his wife and family, and never supported them or had contact with them. During this time, he had open relationships with other women while still married to his first wife. Scofield was in love, or rather in lust, with two other women, and dated both of them at the same time. When his wife finally divorced him because of his lifestyle, he married a woman by the name of Helen Van Wark, with whom he was living with adulterously. He had a egregious life that impugned the name of Christ, according to Canfield. (18)
Scofield assumed all sorts of phony credentials. From that of a minister to that of a Bible scholar to that of a lawyer. He presented himself as a lawyer, though he was not admitted to the bar until his friends in Kansas used their influence to get him admitted. In the same manner, he gave himself a theological doctorate degree, though he had never attended any school and had no formal training whatsoever. Amazingly, some Christians still call Scofield "Dr. Scofield" with the knowledge that he never attended a college or university.
He reportedly was converted again in September of 1879, even though he was a professing Christian before that date. He pastored various churches, including a Congregational mission church in Dallas, Texas, and the Trinitarian Congregational Church in Northfield, Massachusetts, D. L. Moody's home church. He spent nearly a year in Switzerland in research, but was back in Dallas in 1905. Scofield acted as an absent pastor, continuing his research with another trip to Europe. (19) He seemed to ascend up the religious success ladder in much the same manner and speed that he navigated the secular ladder of success-by bypassing all the necessary steps along the way.
In 1901, Scofield was attending one of the Niagara Bible Conferences. Although these conferences began with good intentions as the Believers Meeting for Bible Study, they eventually turned into a instrument of studying and disseminating J. N. Darby's dispensational theories. The complicated structure of dispensationalism gave Scofield the idea of putting together a reference Bible that would help people understand it. In other words, not many would grasp the doctrine of dispensationalism without a great deal of prompting through references and notes inserted at key Scriptures. The same is true of dispensationalism today. In an advertisement for his books, dispensationalism proponent Tim LayHaye writes,
"The Rapture is the first phase of the Christ's second coming. It is that moment when, as the apostle Paul said, "The Lord himself shall descend with a shout....The dead in Christ will rise first then we, who are alive and remain, will be 'caught up' (raptured) with them to meet the Lord in the air--and so shall we ever be with the Lord" (I Thessalonians 4:16-17). It is the same experience he describes in First Corinthians 15:51 as the moment Christians are "changed" from "mortal" to "immortal". This is expected by most Christians to occur before the seven years of Tribulation described in Revelation, chapters 6-19. For more reading on this subject, there are a number of books you can read to help you understand this difficult subject:" (20)
LaHaye writes glibly, as if the Scripture he is quoting clearly presents his interpretation. So mesmerized by PTR is LaHaye that he does not even recognize that there is not even a hint of a pre-tribulation rapture in the Scripture reference he gives. By the way, all the books by LaHaye in the Left Behind series are fictional.
Nevertheless, it was at the Niagra Bible Conference in 1901 that Scofield confided to his friends that he intended to develop a reference Bible that would bring about "this new beginning and new testimony." Scofield noted, however, that financial backing was the main drawback. The following year, one of those friends he confided in, A. C. Gaebelein, helped him get the financial aid that that he requested. Scofield and his wife went abroad in 1904 to work on the notes for the Bible. In England, he was able to research and study first hand the any-moment coming and secret rapture doctrine of J.N. Darby in the hotbed of its beginnings.
C. I. Scofield became proficient in all the aspects of Darbyism. It was because of the influence of J. N Darby's dispensationalism theory, including the any-moment coming and secret rapture, that he decided to put together a reference Bible that would bring Darbyite dispensationalism to everyone in America by feeding the minds of the unsuspecting and newly converted. In my opinion, Darby would not have reached very far into the world with his beliefs had it not been for Scofield. Neither would Scofield's notes have attained the high acclaim that they eventually achieved if they had been compiled into a book as a commentary to the Bible.
If Darby is called the father of dispensationalism, Scofield was certainly its mother, since he birthed dispensationalism and Pre-tribulation Rapture into the world through his reference Bible (more about the Scofield Reference Bible in the following chapter). Because of Scofield, Darby's teachings on Pre-tribulation Rapture have now become the foremost eschatological doctrine in the professing Church concerning the coming of the Lord.
Without a doubt, Scofield went to work on his reference Bible for the sole purpose of spreading Darby's doctrine. His indoctrination with Darby's dispensationalism through Dr. James Brooks and his involvement in the Niagra Bible Conferences over the years filled him with fascination for Darby's unique bend on the Scriptures. It is illogical to conclude that he had any other reason for putting together the Scofield reference Bible. Sandeen writes this:
"At any rate it is clear that the Scofield Reference Bible was uncompromisingly Darbyite dispensationalist in doctrine and taught the any-moment coming and the secret rapture of the church. Although he consulted post-tribulationist scholars, their views about the time of the advent were not reflected in his work.
Scofield wrote in the preface to the Reference Bible, "The editor disclaims originality." This apology was also his boast. To be original was not the mark of a good millenarian exegesis. But Scofield also meant to acknowledge that he had done very little more than put his predecessor's work into a most ingenious and assimilable form. Scofield never demonstrated great ability as a biblical scholar, apologist, or organizer, but in the calendar of Fundamentalist saints no name is better known or more revered." (21)
The Scofield Reference Bible was finally published in 1909. Many ministers of the 1920's and 1930's began preaching Darby's Dispensationalism, yet these men could not have received their information from Darby himself. In Scofield's own words, a "new testimony" had indeed come to America; but it was not a testimony of truth. Although dispensationalism and Pre-tribulation Rapture have become commonly accepted as true doctrine, they were unheard of in the Church for almost 1900 years before John Nelson Darby and in America until Cyrus Ingerson Scofield published his reference Bible.
Forty years after the publication of Scofield's reference Bible, the New and Improved Edition of the reference Bible came along. One of the men who sat on the revision committee was none other than John F. Walvoord. John Walvoord is today called the "dean of the Pre-tribulation Rapture movement." The chronology is as follows: Darby to Scofield; Scofield to Chafer; Chafer to Dallas Theological Seminary; and John Walvrood to all of America.
Because of Scofield, J. N. Darby's idea of God's two separate purposes in history has risen to a place of common acceptance among the Bible-believing movement in America (then centered in Fundamentalism) within a century of its origin. Some have declared the Scofield Reference Bible to be the leading cause for the fall of American civilization because of its presentation of an antinomianism that rejects the moral law of God as the standard for living today. Also, some claim that the church is weak, ineffective, and failing because of the hope in the coming of Christ for His own rather than in a victorious church. I call it simply the continuation of Darby's heresy with a new twist on Calvin's Perseverance of the Saints. There are others who view Scofield as a drunkard, a liar, an adulterer, and a perjurer who took up preaching as an easy way to fortune and fame. In my opinion, this would be the easy way out.
We could simply demonize the man and be done with him and his doctrine. However, whether he was truly saved or not is not the point, because his doctrine is still as false in any case. I view Scofield simply as a man who had his own motives for what he did, and I do not believe that these motives were inspired by God. In my opinion, he was motivated somewhat by the need to be somebody, and saw an opportunity to bring something new into the Church, thereby making a name for himself. He seemed to crave attention and honor, as is evidenced by the act of his conferring a doctorate on himself when he had no formal theological training.
If you read Scofield's notes carefully, the references that he uses are very weak and even false, at times. A disrespect or lack of understanding of correct biblical hermeneutics surfaces throughout the Scofield Reference Bible. A reliable assumption is that he probably did not get dispensationalism and its tainted fruit, Pre-tribulation Rapture, from the Holy Spirit while studying the Word of God. There is no doubt in my mind that he received it from men. Thus, Pre-Tribulation Rapture it is now thought by the majority of fundamentalist to be Biblical truth clearly supported by the Scripture, although it was non-existent in the Church for almost 1900 years. What a contrast to the words of Paul, who said,
"But I make known to you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. {12} For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but it came through the revelation of Jesus Christ." (Gal. 1:11-12 NKJV)
Lewis Sperry Chafer
On the heels of Scofield came Lewis Sperry Chafer, who was also an unaccredited, self-appointed theologian. Chafer is quoted as having said:
"The very fact that I did not study a prescribed course in theology made it possible for me to approach the subject with an unprejudiced mind to be concerned only with what the Bible was actually teaches." (22)
Lewis Sperry Chafer (1871-1952) was a student and ardent admirer of Scofield to the end. In 1924, Chafer founded the Dallas Theological Seminary, dispensationalism's first claim to theological validity. Although Chafer expressed disdain and scorn for established, time-honored theology, he went about to establish a theological school in stark contrast to his statements. He produced the eight volume Systematic Theology, which included Darbyite dispensationalism, through the reference notes of C. I Scofield. Bernard Ramm makes a fascinating comparison of Chafer's credentials to Karl Barth, one of the men Chafer scorned. The following is a compilation of this comparison:
"Chafer spent three years at Oberlin College and then left to teach in a school for boys that D. L. Moody had founded. That was the sum total of Chafer's formal education.
" Barth studied in the universities of Bern, Marberg, Berlin, and Tübingen. He studied under such men as Adolph von Harnack, Reinhold Seeberg, Julis Kaftan, Herman Gunkel, Theodor Häring, Wilhelm Herrmann, Johannes Weiss, and Adolph Jülicher. In philosophy, he studied under the famous neo-Kantians Hermann Cohen and Paul Natorp. In addition, Barth eventually was honored with eleven doctorates from substantial universities and collected a number of prizes and awards.
"Having no formal theological education, Chafer also had no linguistic training. It is apparent from his Systematic Theology that he is always working with secondary sources, whether in the biblical languages or theological literature.
"Having gone through the typical Swiss gymnasium (a sort of high school in Germany and Switzerland to prepare students for university), Barth was taught Latin, Greek, and French. When he came to the Scripture, he worked with both the Hebrew and Greek Testaments, and when he cites the church fathers he sites the original Greek or Latin. In addition, he could speak the modern languages of Swiss German, German, English, French, and Italian, and complained of his poor ability in Dutch.
"Reading Chafer's theology, it is apparent that he is not at home at all in philosophy. He makes rare references to philosophers, and in most cases Chafer is citing some other sources and not the philosopher directly.
"Barth learned philosophy from Cohen and Natorp. His writings show that he is totally competent in philosophy, having written technical interpretations of such philosophers as Kant, Hegel, Heidegger, Jaspers, and Sarte. Wherever he does get into philosophical territory, he handles the matters with competence. Naturally he knew well the philosophy of Anselm and Thomas Aquinas.
"Chafer's coverage of historical theology is minimal. Altough he sites Augustine, Calvin, Edwards and others, he does so almost uniformly from a secondary source. Judging from his published theology, he had rarely read the original works of the great theologians.
"Bath's coverage of historical theology is monumental. Furthermore, he always cites them in their original language. It is generally conceded that if Barth has chosen to specialize in historical theology he would have written the most definitive book in the history of theology. As the Church Dogmatics now stands, its many sections of historical theology make the reading of the text valuable alone for that reason. If one has no use for Barth's theology, there is still great worth in reading it for the historical theology.
"Chafer's citation of Scripture's is modest. There are not more than 800 references in the index.
"Barth's citation of Scripture is the greatest in the history of theology--15,000. Furthermore, there are 2,000 long and short exegetical sections in the Church Dogmatics, showing Barth's intense occupation with the text of the Scripture. And in addition to that are all the concept concordances of Scriptural texts scattered throughout the Church Dogmatics. Even master's these and doctrinal dissertations on Barth never give the proper impression of Barth's vast knowledge of Holy Scripture, his incessant citing of it, and the numerous exegetical inserts." (23)
I believe it is fair to present Ramm's comparison because of this ludicrous statement of Chafer's, which I will post again here:
"The very fact that I did not study a prescribed course in theology made it possible for me to approach the subject with an unprejudiced mind to be concerned only with what the Bible actually teaches."
He then proceeds to use the works of people trained in theology to compile his work, Systematic Theology. (emphasis added) His statement is disingenuous, since it apparent that he has enough respect for those trained in theology to use their works. It is apparent that Chafer's true intent was a preemptive effort to disqualify those who were more than qualified to expose the fallacies of his doctrine before they had the opportunity to get the ear of the public. His only defense was that ignorance equals spirituality, and therefore, hermeneutic perfection.
Can you imagine someone who wanted to be a medical doctor declaring that the hundreds of years of medical research that he had obtained were worthless to him, because it would cloud his understanding of medicine and medical procedure? Would such a man be successful if he were to go about establishing a medical profession based on his own research of the subject from the very beginning? Chafer set about to establish a new theological system which had been severed from the roots of the original theology that was left to us by the early Church. I cannot understand why he would want to do such a thing, unless he recognized that his shortcomings might disqualify him as a valid theologian. The result is a systematic theology that works about as well as a space shuttle built by a shade tree mechanic by using parts from a junk yard and working with inferior tools and knowledge.
Dispensationalism today is the monumental effort of a group of pseudo-spiritual men armed with colossal egos and an ignorance-is-spiritual perfection defense to make a name for themselves. In doing so, they have created a doctrinal cancer that has eaten away the undergirdings of the Christian faith and principles. They enjoyed their brief claim to fame while they lived, but at the expense of the deception of millions today. It did not seem to bother them that they had built their personal kingdoms at the expense of truth and Divine continuity. Their predecessors today are plundering the masses in much the same way, with no regard for the eternal welfare of those they are deceiving. For this purpose, it is imperative that men with courage stand up and declare the truth about dispensationalism and its fantasy doctrine of Pre-tribulation Rapture.
1. (Dispensationalism Today [Moody 1965]. pp.44-48).
2. John F. Walvoord, review of An Historical Sketch of the Brethren Movement, by H. A.Ironside, in Bibliotheca Sacra, 1942, p. 378.
3. James L. Blevins, Dispensations,
4. John Nelson Darby: fender of the Faith, (article) by Larry V. Crutchfield <
5. Earnest Sandeen, The Roots of Fudamentalism: 1800-1920, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970) page 31, para. 1
6. The History of the Brethren, Napoleon Noel, W. F. Knapp
7. John Nelson Darby: Fender of the Faith, (article) by Larry V. Crutchfield
8. William Reid, Plymouth Brethrenism Unveiled and Refuted, William Oliphant and Company
9. Robert Cameron, Scriptural Truth about the Lord's Return, pp. 146-7
11. James C. L (Crawford Ledlie) Carson, The Heresies of the Plymouth Brethren , London: Houlston, 1870.
12. Earnest Sandeen, The Roots of Fudamentalism: 1800-1920, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970) pp 62-3
14. James L. Blevins, Dispensations, Holman Bible Dictionary
15. Earnest Sandeen, The Roots of Fudamentalism: 1800-1920, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970) page 15
17. Earnest Sandeen, The Roots of Fudamentalism: 1800-1920, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970) pp 73-4; Quoting Thomas Croskery, "The Plymouth Brethren," Princeton Review 1 (1872 ): 48
18. Joseph M. Canfield, The Incredible Scofield, Ross House Books
19. Glenn R. Goss, Th. D. Professor of Bible Philadelphia College of Bible (article) The Scofield Bible and C. I. Scofield
20. Tim LaHaye, What is the Rapture?, article
21. Earnest Sandeen, The Roots of Fudamentalism: 1800-1920, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970) page 224
22. Lewis Sperry Chafer, Systematic Theology, vol. 8 (Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1948, pp. 5-6
23. Benard Ramm, After Fundamentalism, San Francisco: Harper and Rowe, 1963, pp.206-209
| Previous | Contents | Next |
© 1996 - 2012 All Code, Design, Graphics & Hosting by AVB
Disclaimer: This material is presented "as is." All teaching should be prayerfully compared with the Word Of God.