Though many noted scholars and good Christians believe and teach the pre-trib theory, they do so erroneously, because neither Jesus, Paul, Peter, John, nor any other writer of the Bible taught this. Nor did the early church fathers, or anyone else for many hundreds of years.
YOU WILL IN THIS DISCOURSE, DISCOVER THE SOURCE OF THE PRE-TRIBULATION RAPTURE TEACHING, AND YOU WILL PLAINLY SEE THAT IT IS NOT A BIBLICAL DOCTRINE.
If anyone has researched this issue and have found evidence contrary to what follows, I would appreciate you informing me as to how I can obtain such documents.
Did you know that the teaching of the Rapture taking place before the tribulation begins has only been taught since 1812.
Did you know that when this teaching first started, it was taught that only SOME Christians would be caught up at the Rapture--that is, there would only be a partial Rapture?
Did you know that NONE of this was ever taught prior to 1812, and that all variations of that teaching have been developed since that date? I mean by this that NO New Testament Rapture writer taught a Pre-Tribulation Rapture, and NONE of the early church fathers taught it. There was no such teaching published BEFORE 1812.
The first publication that was published in 1812, that taught this theory was entitled "The Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty," written by Emmanuel Lacunza, a Jesuit priest from Chile, writing under the assumed name of Rabbi Juan Josafat Ben-Ezra as a converted Jew, and first published in Spain in 1812. This book was later translated into English by Rev. Edward Irving and published in London England, in 1827.
With the publication of this book, the seeds were sown for the development and growth of the Pre-Tribulation error.
It seems, for some reason, the Christian public is kept in the dark as to Lacunza's teaching on this subject. Why has not the full teaching by this Catholic Jesuit priest on this subject, written under an assumed name, been exposed to Bible students long before now?
Emmanuel Lacunza (or Manuel de Lacunza y Diaz), a Chilean theologian of Spanish descent (born in Santiago, Chile, July 19, 1731, and died at Imola, Italy, June 17 1801), became a member of the Jesuit order in 1747 at the age of 16. When the Jesuits were expelled from Spain and its colonies in 1767, he went to Italy, where the balance of his life was spent in writing a commentary on the Second Coming of Christ.
Rev. Edward Irving, a presbyter of the Church of Scotland, who had been the assistant to Dr. Chalmbers in Glasgow, translated this book of Lacunza's from the Spanish in 1826, and it was published in English by L. B. Seely and Son, Fleet Street, London, in 1827. In England, Irving was pastor of the Regent Square Presbyterian Church in London. Irving said: "This book entitled 'La Venida del Mesias en Gloria y Majestad,' i.e. 'The Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty,' was, so far as I can learn, first printed in Spain in the year 1812, in three volumes, during the short period of the Cortez, from which edition our translation is made." (Preliminary Discourse, page xv).
Lacunza wrote this book under the assumed name of Rabbi Ben-Ezra as a "converted Jew". The book was finished in 1790, and then circulated in manuscript form before it was published at Cadiz, Spain, in 1812. This was during the time of Cortez in Spain, and after Cortez the book was suppressed, and as much as possible withdrawn from circulation. Lacunza died in June 1801, before the work was ever published in book form. Later it was published in London, Mexico, Paris and elsewhere in various languages. The 1812 edition was published in abridged form, and then a complete Spanish edition was published in London in 1816 in four volumes. It was from the 1812 Spanish edition that Edward Irving made His translation in 1826.
Lacunza taught that the Rapture will be "Much before His arrival at the earth."
Commenting on 1 Thes. 4:13-18, Lacunza had this to say:
"from these words the apostle, which he himself gives us to know, that he spoke by the word of the Lord, we derive two truths of utmost importance; first, that when the Lord returns from heaven to earth, upon His coming forth from heaven, and MUCH BEFORE HIS ARRIVAL AT THE EARTH, He will give His orders, and send forth His commandment as King and God omnipotent; which is all signified in these words, With a shout, (in the vulgate, jus su, i.e. by the order) with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God. At this voice of the Son of God, those who hear it, shall forthwith arise, and, as saith the Evangelist St. John (chapter v. 25.) 'those who will hear shall live.' "
"The second truth, which we derive from this text of St. Paul, is, that after the raising up of those dead WHO ARE IN CHRIST, the living in the day likewise belong to Christ, (who according to the other notices which we find in the gospels, cannot be many, but will be very FEW, as we shall see in the proper place,) all those of this CLASS then shall be joined to the dead in Christ already raised, shall ascend from the earth and go to receive Christ; 'then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.'" (Vol. 1, part I, c. VI, pp. 99-100).
So, it is evident from the above quote, Lacunza taught that when Christ comes from heaven the dead in Christ will be raised and the living Christians will be caught to meet Christ, and this will occur much before His arrival on the earth.
How much "before" we will quote later.
After the saints are caught up Lacunza makes this observation; "things being then in this state, and the Lord having nothing in the whole orb of the earth to contemplate...there shall FORTHWITH BEGIN TO BE ACCOMPLISHED over this orb of the earth ALL THOSE GREAT AND HORRIBLE THINGS which are announced for that day...." (Vol. 2, Part III, pp. 215-216).
The Scriptures he uses to show what will happen between the Rapture of the saints and His actual coming to earth with the saints, are as follows:
Isaiah 24:13-14, 17:20; Rev. 14:19; Isaiah 59:17-18, 63:6, 14:9, 11; Jeremiah 30:23-24; Malachi 4:1.
Are you aware that these are the same passages that are used by those today who believe in a Pre-Tribulation Rapture to describe the tribulation period which they say follows the Rapture. In the Scofield Reference Bible, Scofield has "The Great Tribulation" title over Isaiah 24:17-20. He designates the passage in Rev. 14:19, "Visions of Armageddon." He labels Isaiah 63:6, "The day of vengeance". All of these things says Lacunza, begin happening immediately after Christ appears above the atmosphere and raises the saints from the dead and catches up the worthy saints with them. He does not say at this point how long all this will take, but he does say, "much before" Christ comes to earth. Later on in His writing he does state a time period. Also, he does not say in his book at exactly what chronological point in the book of Revelation he places the Rapture. But at one place in his book he did say, "It is then, my friend, not only probably, but as it were, evident that the Apocalypse of St. John, omitting at present the first three chapters, is a prophecy wholly directed to the coming or revelation of Jesus Christ." (Vol. 1, Part II, p. 201). So then, the Rapture according to Lacunza must occur sometime after the first three chapters of Revelation and before these dreadful judgments of God begin to occur on the earth.
Pre-Tribbers today, of course, believe that the Rapture takes place at Rev. 4:1, immediately following the first three chapters.
Lacunza taught that this time of tribulation and judgment on the earth will last for at lease 45 days.
What would be the length of time involved for its part of the "tribulation" period to take place, according to Lacunza? Remember, he said that the first appearance of Christ from heaven, when He raises the worthy Christians up to meet Him would be "much before" His actual descent to earth, and that in between there would be those "horrible things" which will come on the earth. How much time does he assign to this expression, "much before"?
Lacunza at first said that he did not know how long this tribulation period would last; but evidently after further study he had more to say about a definite time period. At first he said:
"This great day being at length concluded, (the time of duration of which we know not,) the horrible tempest being overpast, all the impious, the sinful being exterminated thense...." (Vol. 2, Part III, ch. v., p. 249).
Then in the very next chapter of his book, after great reflection, he puts an "Addition" which says:
"Although it was said at the beginning of the fourth section that it is uncertain how long the great and terrible day of the Lord's Coming will endure, that is, the commotion, perturbation, and agitation of our globe; yet having now read with great reflection the xiith chapter of the prophet Daniel, it appeareth to me certain that it cannot endure a shorter time period than the space of forty-five natural days. Whoever readeth this chapter shall at once perceive, without the possibility of doubt, that it is a prophecy wholly directed to the last times, very immediate upon the coming of the Lord, forasmuch as there are announced therin these two capital points only; first, the vocation and the conversion of the Jews; second, the antichristian temptation and tribulation of the Gentiles. Of this latter the prophet, or the angel who speaks to him, says that it shall endure in all its force twelve hundred and ninety days, which is forty and three months. 'And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.' (Dan. xii. 11). Which days being concluded, (doubtless in the first beginning of the Day of the Lord,) these words are added, which have ever appeared to me an impenetrable mystery; 'Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days;' (Dan. xii. 12,) the difference between which two periods is exactly forty and five."
This period of time following the Rapture during which those things take place before Christ actually comes on down to the earth is described by Lacunza as being the length of time he finally arrived--not less "Than the space of forty-five natural days". But these things were not to happen upon the earth until the Christians had been caught up, and only after all these things were accomplished would Christ then actually come to earth.
Here we see the first introduction of a two-stage Second Coming of Christ with an intervening period of at least 45 days of tribulation and judgments in between the two stages. True, the period was only 45 days, but it was not long after this book was published that the period of time became three and one-half years, and then finally seven years. The idea of a Pre-Trib Rapture got its start in this book, published in Spanish in 1812, and in English in 1827. As we know by the Scriptures, this conclusion was not based on the Bible, but by some man's distorted interpretation of it.
Did Edward Irving believe in a two-stage Second Coming before translating Lacunza's book?
It is certain that Edward Irving did not believe in a two-stage Second Coming before he translated Lacunza's book, because in his own words in the "Preliminary Discourse" which he wrote and inserted in the front of the book and which he dated as written on Christmas Day, 1826 (the year before the date of publication of the book itself), he said the following:
"...these judgments upon the Gentile nations and all the earth, he will finish by His own personal appearance in flaming fire, taking vengeance on those who know not God and obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ; raising those who sleep in Jesus, and changing those of the Gentile church who still abide in life...."
What Irving believed before he translated Lacunza's book was that the Church would go through the tribulation.
But Irving clearly understood what Lacunza taught, and confessed being influenced by it.
Was Irving influenced at all by Lacunza's teaching? Note this statement by Irving: "...though I differ from him in these essential points. Nay, as I have observed, he sometimes made me to suspect that there might be toward the end, three years and a half in which all those things may be literally fulfulled of the personal Antichrist." (Preliminary Discourse, p. xlii).
Irving wanted all who read his translation to understand that he himself had not been swayed from his own previous beliefs on this matter (that the Church would face the tribulation) but yet he confesses that Lacuza's teaching did trouble him on this. Notice how he discusses this in an earlier statement when discussing the "numbers 1260, 1290, and 1335 days as determining the duration of the great and awful era which precedes the coming of the Lord." Irving wrote: "And I confess that upon this system he hath made out such a very strong case, derived and deduced from all the scriptures, that though he hath not shaken me in the least out of the interpretation of these numbers, he hath sometimes awakened me in my mind the suspicion of a possibility, that when the time of the last great anti christian trouble shall arrive, these numbers may be found to have a literal application without prejudice to the symbolical one which they have already had." (Preliminary Discourse, p. xxx).
What I am trying to establish here is that Lacunza taught a time period of several years for the tribulation period with 45 days (at least) of that time to be between the rapture and the coming of Christ to the earth, during which time of 45 days God's judgments would be poured out on the earth. These conclusions were arrived at through these numbers, "1260, 1290, and 1335 days", of which Irving was aware of. And though Irving disagreed with Lacunza, he did say that he suspected and had suspicion that Lacunza might be correct!
So if later on we find Edward Irving and his followers teaching a two-stage Second Coming, with an intervening time between the two stages, where can we suspect that Irving first heard of this teaching? Is this difficult to answer? And keep in mind, he translated this book in 1826, and it was published in 1827.
How else can we account for the emphasis by Irving and his followers of a new theory along this line not long after this book was translated by him, if this book had not helped shape his thinking along this line? It certainly was a change from what he previously believed. There is no record, to my knowledge, of any other published teaching by anybody else prior to 1812 (first edition of Lacunza's book in Spanish) which set forth a two- stage Second Coming of Christ idea such as we find in Lacunza's book. Irving's translation of the book was published in 1827. It was not long after the publication of this book that Irving and his followers (known as Irvingites) began to preach that Christ would come first for His saints, and then after a period of tribulation, He would come with His saints to destroy Antichrist and to reign. It has been said that he heard what he believed to be a voice from heaven, and in obedience to that voice began to preach this Rapture of the Saints to take place prior to the Revelation of Christ. Remember that in his Preliminary Discourse in Lacunza's book, Irving said that Lacunza had presented such a strong case that it made him suspect and have suspicion of the possibility that Lacunza was right!
Dr. S. P. Tregelles, a Greek scholar and editor of the Greek New Testament, of Plymouth, England, said that he was not aware that there was to be a secret rapture of the church until this teaching was given in Edward Irving's Church, where it was given as an utterance of the Holy Spirit.
In September, 1830, three years after Edward Irving's translation of Lacunza's book was published, "The Morning Watch" (a journal of Edward Irving) published an article which pointed out a distinction between the two stages of the Second Coming.
Robert Baxter, as associate of Edward Irving, on January 14, 1832, gave a "revelation" that Jesus would come in three and one-half years for the saints, and that later, after the reign of the Antichrist, Jesus would return with His saints. He later renounced some of his views as of Satan and not the Holy Spirit. His own views on the two-stage coming of Christ he said he got from Edward Irving in 1831.
Edward Irving would not allow a cheaper abridged edition of his translated book to be printed and circulated until all copies of his 1827 edition had been exhausted. But in 1833 this took place, and quantities of the cheaper edition began to reach the public. By that time, prophecy was in high gear.
Margaret MacDonald and her "Revelation"
In April of 1830, in port Glasgow, Scotland, a fifteen year old girl by the name of Margaret MacDonald during a period of several hours of prophecy and vision claimed a new revelation which she said needed to be revealed to others. According to her account, she saw that there would be a partial rapture--that is, only those who were filled with the Spirit would be caught up to meet Christ when He comes. She said that to be filled with the Spirit would fit us to enter into the marriage supper of the Lamb. Much has been made of this girl's "revelation", and because of that matter a secret partial rapture was involved, some have insisted this was the origin of the "pre-tribulation" rapture theory.
A number of writers, for many years, have mentioned these visions and revelations of Margaret MacDonald. But in 1972 Dave Macpherson, a Christian newspaper writer and journalist, spent extended time in research in Scotland and England concerning this matter. He feels that Margaret MacDonald was the first person ever to teach the pre-tribulation rapture idea. The results and conclusions of his research are published in his book, " The Incredible Cover-Up", which may be purchased from Omega Publications, P.O. Box 4130. Medford, Oregon 97501.
Possibly the only person ever to record those prophecies of Margaret MacDonald in print was Robert Norton in a rare book entitled, "The Restoration of Apostles and Prophets" in the Catholic Apostolic Church" (London, 1861). Here is Margaret MacDonald's "Revelation" as she wrote it and as printed in Norton's book.
"I felt this needed to be revealed, and that there was great darkness and error about it; but suddenly it was burst upon me with a glorious light. I saw that it was the Lord Himself descending from heaven with a shout--the glorified Man--even Jesus; but that all must be, as Stephen was, filled with the Holy Ghost, that they might look up and see the Father's glory. I saw the error that men think it will be something seen by the natural eye, but it is spiritual discernment that is needed--the eye of God in his people. Many passages were revealed in a light which I had not before seen them. I repeated, 'Now is the kingdom of heaven liken unto ten virgins who went forth to meet the bridegroom, five wise and five foolish. But ye not unwise, but understanding what the will of the Lord is; and be not drunk with wine, but be filled with the Spirit.' This was the oil the wise 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 Spirit of Christ is. 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. I saw that the glory of the ministration of the Spirit had not been known. I repeated frequently, "The spiritual temple must and shall be reared, and the fullness of Christ poured into His body; and then we shall be caught up to meet Him. None will be counted worthy of this calling but his body the church; a candlestick all of gold. Oh, the glorious inbreaking of God now about to burst on this earth; the glorious temple now about to be reared; the bride adorned for her husband: and oh, what a holy, holy bride she must be, to be prepared for such a glorious Bridegroom. '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 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 light of the sun, that shone about me. I felt that those who were filled with the Spirit could see spiritual things, and be, as it were, 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 the other left. I saw the people of God in an awfully dangerous situation. Now will the wicked one be revealed with all power and signs, and lying wonders, so that if it were possible the very elect would be deceived. It will be a fiery trial. Every soul shall be shaken to the very centre; but the trial of real faith will be found to honour and praise and glory. Nothing shall be made manifest; the love of many shall wax cold. I said, Now shall the awful sight of a false Christ be seen on this earth; and nothing but Christ in us can detect this awful attempt of the enemy to deceive, 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 of every good work of the Spirit. In proportion as the Spirit of God works, so will he; when our Lord anoints men with power, so will he. This is the trial through which those are to pass, who will be counted worthy to stand before the Son of Man. There will be an outward trial, but principally temptation. It is brought on by the outpouring of the Spirit, and will increase in proportion as the Spirit is poured out. 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 with God. It is not by might nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the Lord. I saw it to be the will of God that all should be filled; but what hindered the life of God from being received by His people was their turning from Jesus,--passing the cross, through which every drop of the Spirit flows through us. Oh, it is much needed, a leading back to the cross. I saw that night, and often since, that there will be an outpouring of the Spirit such as not been; a baptism of fire that all the dross may be put away;--the servants of God sealed in their foreheads; His holy image in His people; the bride made comely by His comeliness put upon her.--Jesus wants his bride. His desire is towards us. He shall come and will not tarry." (pp. 15-18).
In his book, Robert Norton said of Margaret MacDonald's account of her prophecy, "...Here we first see the distinction between that final stage of the Lord's coming, when every eye shall see Him, and His prior appearing in glory to them that look for Him.
It is not clear from Miss MacDonald's prophecy that Christians will be taken out of the world before the time of tribulation. It seems that she was saying that Christians will face the temptation of the false christ (antichrist) and be in "an awfully dangerous situation", and that only the Spirit in us will enable us to be kept from being deceived; and that as the Spirit works, so will the antichrist; but the pouring out of the Spirit will "fit us to enter into the marriage supper of the Lamb", and those filled with the Spirit would be taken while the others would be left. She definitely taught that only those who are Spirit-filled will be caught up to meet Christ when He comes. This is the partial rapture theory, the same as Lacunza taught, except that Lacunza's qualifications for worthiness to be caught up at the Rapture were somewhat different than Margaret's. In her "revelation" she did not say what will finally happen to other Christians who were not Spirit-filled and not caught up at the time Christ comes. Lacunza did explain that in his book. He placed their resurrection at the time of the general resurrection following the Millennium. MacDonald did not say anything about what happens between the time when the Spirit-filled Christians are raptured and when the Lord descends on the earth, nor even if there is any time element in between. However, Lacunza taught there was much time involved between the appearance of Christ, at which time the Worthy Christians will be resurrected, and the time when He comes on down to earth. It must be that in her "revelation", this was not revealed to her, that is, what would happen to the Christians who were not Spirit-filled.
Margaret MacDonald plainly said, "This is the trial through which those are to pass who will be counted worthy to stand before the Son of Man." The trial referred to was that of the Antichrist being "seen on earth" who will imitate the Holy Spirit, "so that if it were possible the very elect will be deceived." MacDonald said that this trial is brought on by the outpouring of the Holy Spirit, and will increase in proportion as the Spirit is poured out. It is this "pouring out" that fits the Christian to be worthy to meet Christ when He comes. She said: "The spiritual temple must and shall be reared, and the fullness of Christ poured into His body, and then shall we be caught up to meet Him."
But Robert Norton in his book (1861) said: "Here we first see the distinction between that final stage of the Lord's coming, when every eye shall see Him, and is prior appearing in glory to them that look for Him". MacDonald did teach a partial rapture, but this does not necessarily mean that the teaching included a tribulation, following the rapture of the worthy, for the Christians that did not go in the rapture. Norton, may have believed this himself, but why did he say that MacDonald first believed this? Where did he gather this from the revelation which he published? Surely it was not from some other writing or vision of MacDonald's or any one else, because he said, "Here we first see", and he was referring to this particular vision. It is not right to take for granted that MacDonald believed in the Rapture being followed by the tribulation unless she had specifically said so. It would be more logical to think that her view would have been the same as prevalent among believers at that time, that is, tribulation then the Rapture. What is new in her revelation seems to be that of just Spirit-filled Christians being caught up at the Second Coming of Christ following heavy trials and tribulation by the Antichrist. This was "partial rapture" teaching, the same as Lacunza taught. Nothing in her vision indicated what would happen to the other Christians, which Lacunza did discuss--how their spirits would come down with Christ when He comes on to the earth, but their bodies remain in the grave until the general resurrection.
Robert Norton and his "Partial Rapture" and Pre-Tribulation Rapture Teaching.
Robert Norton was for many years pastor at Holbeck, England, and while there he taught the "partial rapture" and "Pre-Tribulation rapture" ideas. In a sermon entitled, "the Nearness of the second Coming of Christ," he said the folowing:
"...when man-worship, blasphemy, and infatuation of a surely judical blindness, are rapidly preparing the way for that full and final revelation of Antichrist, which awaiteth only the taking away of the 144,000 who shall first be caught up to God and His throne." (p.6).
A note at the bottom of page 6 said: "...the appearing of the Lord Jesus, 'unto them that look for Him,' will preceed the final reign of Antichrist."
"The result at which we shall arrive, I believe, will be conviction that the following is an outline of the events immediately before us. The midnight cry 'Behold the Bridegroom commeth,' which the Holy Ghost is now beginning to proclaim,--spreading through Christendom, shall accomplish the gathering and perfecting of the 144,000 'sealed ones', the 'first fruits;' who shall escape the things that are coming on the earth by being caught up to meet the Lord in the air, on that solemn night when there shall be two in bed, and one shall be taken and the other left, the great majority of the baptized, the 'innumerable multitude' being left until the harvest, to ripen in the great tribulation under Antichrist, who shall reigh supreme, the object of almost universal worship for a few dreadful years.' (p. 9).
"But the point which most immediately and practically concerns us at present, is the distinction between those who by receiving the Sealing of the Holy Ghost through the laying on of the Apostles' hands, are translated beyond the reach of Antichrist; and those who through neglecting this sealing, this filling of their lamps with oil, are left behind, that through suffering even unto death be counted worthy to escape the things which are coming upon the earth and to stand before the Son of Man!" (pp. 10-11). ("The Nearness of the Second Coming of Christ", published in London by Thomas Bosworth, 215 Regent Street, T. Harrison, Briggate. Leeds, 1852).
(Lacunza said the ones to be caught up were those who partook of the sacrament of the Eucharist; Margaret MacDonald said they were the ones who were filled with the Spirit; and Robert Norton said they were to be those sealed by the Holy Ghost by the laying on of hands.)
Accordingly, Norton believed in a pre-tribulation rapture, and also a partial rapture. This book was published in 1852, nine years before (1861) his book was published in which he said that in MacDonald's revelation was first seen "the distinction between that final stage of the Lord's coming, when every eye shall see Him, and his prior appearing in glory to them that look for him," and 22 years after MacDonald had her "revelation". But notice something different in their teachings: Both Norton and MacDonald wanted to be found worthy "to stand before the Son of Man"; But Norton wanted to do this by being taken out of the earth before the awful things that were about to come on the earth (Pre-Tribulation Rapture), while MacDonald believed that those who were counted worthy to stand before the Son of Man would pass through the trial (the working of Antichrist) which she had mentioned (Post-Tribulation Rapture). "Nothing but what is of God will stand," she said.
So it seems that Norton was a Pre-Tribulation Rapturist, while MacDonald was a Post-Tribulation Rapturist; but both of them believed in a partial rapture--a rapture of only certain Christians, as Lacunza had also taught.
It was from these type of teachings that began in the early 1800's and taught first in Lacunza's book, came the development of our present-day system of Pre-Tribulation Rapture teaching as held by most Pre-Tribulationists. Not to many still hold to the idea of a partial rapture, but believe that all Christians will be raptured when Christ first appears. That will be followed by a seven year tribulation period after Christ comes down to earth to set up His Millennial Kingdom. But basically, the pattern and stage was set when Lacunza's book was first published in 1812 in Spain. His teachings of a partial rapture and then an intervening period of time between that rapture, became the seeds for the development of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture Teachings.
How Margaret MacDonald got her "revelation" can only be from one of three sources: (1) God, (2) the devil, (3) from her own subconscious mind. I do not believe that God would give a vision that is not in line with His Word, therefore, I rule out Him as being the source of her revelation. For what she said to come out as it did in her trance, the idea was probably in her subconscious mind in some form or another. Reading a book such as the one translated by Edward Irving would have set the stage for this. Did she have a copy of Irving's book. Had Irving talked to her, discussed with her, anything from the book he had translated three years earlier (or even given her a copy)? Or , could J. N. Darby have done the same? It would be enlightening to have the answers to these questions. At least we know that Margaret's new "revelation" was not altogether new, but very much like Launza's own thoughts as to only certain Christians being caught up when Christ appears.
But the "secret Rapture" of Margaret MacDonald did not include a Tribulation period following that Rapture. Both secret rapture and intervening judgments were taught by Lacunza, and this teaching was later taught by the Irvingites, the followers of Edward Irving who translated Lacunza's book, and by J. N. Darby who led the Plymouth Brethren movement.
J. N. Darby, the key leader in the beginning of the Plymouth Brethren movement, and who was aquatinted with Edward Irving, visited Miss MacDonald in the days she was having those visions. He rejected those practices, and he already had his new view of the Lord coming for the saints (as contrasted to the later coming to the earth) which he had believed since 1827, as I shall show shortly. And Edward Irving already had his translation of Lacunza's book in which both a partial rapture and a period of time between the Rapture and the Revelation were taught, translated into English in 1826.
The Idea of "Seven Years" as a Duration for the Tribulation Period.
The developed idea of an exact seven years as a duration of the Tribulation period came later. The "seven years" idea was the coupling of the seventieth week of Daniel, with the teaching of the "secret rapture", that gave us the completed "Pre-Tribulation Secret Rapture" teaching as it has now been taught for the last 150 years or so.
Was J. N. Darby Influenced by Lacunza's Book?
On pages 8, 10, and 12 of volume 2 of the "Collected Writings of J. N. Darby", Darby indicated that by 1829 he was knowledgeable about both Irving's and Lacunza's teachings. This was two years after Lacunza's book was published, and a year before Margaret MacDonald's "revelation".
In the book, "The Recovery and Maintenance of the Truth" by A. J. Gardiner (England), Gardiner said:
"It was in 1827 and the years immediately following that there first came into evidence the existence in many different places of a work of God, very small in its beginnings, which showed itself in saints who were feeling dissatisfied with the state of things in the Established Church....In 1827 Mr. J. N. Darby was a curate in County Wicklow, Ireland, but was much disturbed in mind by the action of the then Archbishop of Dublin, who charged his clergy to petition the Government for protection from molestation by Roman Catholics in carrying out their parochial duties. In the exercise of soul which was occasioned, the Lord shewed him that He was the Head of the assembly, which was His body, united to Him by the Holy Spirit, and that each believer was a member of that body. This truth laid hold of him, and as the sovereign right of the Spirit in the assembly to use whom He would became clear to him from Scripture, the error of the clerical principal became apparent to him, and he left the established church in 1828...".
But this book only mentioned one of the two new views which came to Darby in 1827. The other view was his new view on that of the second coming of Christ, that which related to Christ coming for his saints, as separate from the revelation of Christ when He comes to earth.
In Vol. III of his letters, Darby wrote of the beginnings of the work (the Plymouth Brethren movement). Before he left the Established Church in 1828, he was ordained, and he said, "As soon as I was ordained (it is said that he was ordained in 1825), I went among the poor Irish mountaineers,...where I remained two years and three months." During this time he had an accident which laid him up for awhile, during which time he came to those views which caused him to leave the Church. Involved in his new views, he said, "at the same time, I saw that the Christian, having his place in Christ in heaven, as nothing to wait for save the coming of the Saviour." He later said that his view was that the coming of Christ for His saints was "hope", while the revelation of Christ was "prophecy"; and he made a big point of the difference.
As to why these views were not publicized at this early date? He said:
"At that time I had to use crutches when moving about, so that I had no longer the opportunity for making known my conviction in public." "I was not able to put these things in their respective places or arrange them in order, as I can now." "What was to be done? I saw in that word the coming of Christ to take the Church to Himself in glory." (Vol. III. Pages 297-299).
Darby taught there will be events between the Rapture and the Revelation: "His coming to receive the church is our present, heavenly hope. There is no event between me and heaven. There are between this time and Christ's judgment of the earth." (Vol. I, p. 330).
And again Darby expressed his belief this way: "That the saints are caught away before vengeance bursts upon professors is quite certain, because it is when Christ appears that he executes vengeance. (2 Thess. i. 8-10 and a multitude of passages). Now when Christ appears we appear with Him. (Col. iii. 4.)..(Vol. 3. p. 334).
J. N. Darby believed in a Pre-Tribulation Rapture of the saints, but he did not believe in a partial rapture as taught by Lacunza, MacDonald and Norton. He said: "...all the saints will be with Christ at His coming....all who are really members of His body must be with Him. You cannot divide the body." (Vol. 2, p. 230).
Darby definitely taught that the Rapture precedes the 70th week of Prophecy found in Daniel 9:24-27: "Let it be remembered now that we have no date for the rapture of the church--that the dates begin with the a week of Daniel ix, and a half a week of great tribulation when the sacrifice is made to cease. But this does not effect the general testimony of Matthew xxiv. which may begin before the week, and be carried among the Gentile during the great tribulation at Jerusalem." (Vol. 3, p. 424).
In his 79th year, J. N. Darby wrote concerning a congress held in New York, and said: "these are two truths brought out in those days, throwing much light on the truth of the first coming. They have been constantly my theme these fifty years or more (he wrote this in 1879). They started me in my path of service....When man entered into the glory of God consequent on accomplished redemption, the Holy Ghost came down, till He comes to take us up....What set me free in 1827 is still the theme on which my soul dwells, with, I trust, much deeper sense of its importance--something much nearer to me, but the same truths. And blessed truths they are; and the hope, what a hope....Let us be content to be little and despised, but give out the full truth. The present great truth...is the presence of the Holy Ghost....; the future truth-....the coming of the Lord for the saints." (Vol. 2, p. 499).
The coming of Christ for the saints, as distinguished and separated from His coming in vengeance on the earth, was the truth, Darby said, which "set me free in 1827". This statement makes it impossible for someone to believe that Darby got his Pre-Tribulation idea from Margaret MacDonald's vision in 1830. He was already a believer in it since 1827, as he plainly said.
I will point out, however, that the publication of Lacunza's book was in 1827, and the new view of J. N. Darby (which corresponded in measure with what Lacunza taught) also occurred in 1827. How did it happen that the year of the publication of this book coincided with the same year that Darby arrived at his new view on a separated two-stage second coming of Christ? I guess it is possible that Darby arrived independently at his new view, but it hardly seems possible that he was unaware of what Lacunza taught in the book translated by Edward Irving.
The Brethren in Plymouth, England (J. N. Darby's church), were teaching a two-stage second coming by the time of the second meeting their chapel was used in 1831.
The Brethren in Ireland developed the idea of a Pre-Tribulation Rapture in their annual Powerscourt prophetic conferences after it had been introduced at the 1833 session.
The late Dr. Harry A. Ironsides, former pastor of Moody Memorial Church in Chicago, himself a strong pre-tribulationist, and associated for many years with the Brethren assemblies, acknowledged that it was in the Powerscourt meetings in London which began in 1833 that the teaching of the church was brought to light; that is, as he taught, that Jesus would come in the air to take away Christians before the great tribulation began on earth.
J. N. Darby attended these sessions at the castle of Lady Powers Court, as did some of the followers of Edward Irving. The two-stage teaching had been in print by this time for six years in Lacunza's book translated by Edward Irving. Interestingly, a condensation of this translation had been made by someone in order to give it wide circulation in a cheap popular printing, but Irving refused to allow this cheap edition to be published until his own edition had been sold out. It was six years later, in 1833, that this cheap abridged edition came out and began to be circulated. This was the same year the meetings began at Powercourt castle for the purpose of studying prophecy. After this, the secret rapture teaching began to widely spread among Christians.
When Darby's teachings became so evident that they were contrary to the historical faith, many of his associates either left him or were excommunicated because they opposed him.
It has been said that such men as George Mueller (who had been associated with Darby), and Charles H. Spurgeon, would have nothing to do with this new Pre-Tribulation Rapture teaching of Darby's.
The Scofield Reference Bible and Notes.
J. N. Darby visited America seven times (including the 1870 Canada Conference): 1862-63; 1866-68; 1870; 1872-73; 1874-75; 1876-77. He must have had a tremendous influence on the beginnings of the Brethren movement in the western world, as well as on the teachings of a Pre-Tribulation Rapture.
Cyrus I. Scofield (1843-1921), who was he anyway? The Topeka (Kansas) Daily Capital, August 27, 1881 describes him in the following terms: Cyrus I. Scofield, (sic) formerly of Kansas, late lawyer, politician and shyster generally, has come to the surface again... The last personal knowledge that Kansans have had of this peer among scalawags, was when about four years ago, after a series of forgeries and confidence games, he left the state and a destitute family and took refuge in Canada...
Shortly after he left Kansas, leaving his wife and two children dependent upon the bounty of his wife's mother, he wrote his wife that he could invest some 1,300 dollars of her mother's money, all she had, in a manner that would return big interest. After some correspondence he forwarded them a mortgage, signed and executed by one Chas. Best, purporting to convey valuable property in St. Louis. Upon this, the money was sent to him. Afterwards, the mortgages were found to be base forgeries, no such person as Charles Best being in existence, and the property conveyed in the mortgage, fictitious. The Kansas City Journal, December 28, 1899 gives an account of the details of what it refers to as "Scofield's checkered life."
Scofield spent some time in jail. The newspaper goes on to tell of how he was visited in jail by a group of missionaries from the St. Louis Flower Mission. One of them was a lovely lady with whom he fell in love and married. Even after his conversion he seemed unconcerned about his first wife and children. According to the papers he obtained a divorce under false pretenses. He was ordained three years later as a minister of a Congregational church, with no theological training, became for a number of years a student of the writings of J. N. Darby.
The views by J. N. Darby on the Pre-Tribulation Rapture became part of the Scofield Reference Bible notes in 1909. The Scofield Bible was a monumental work, and it stands as one of the greatest promoters of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture theory. Since its publication, upwards to three-million copies of this Bible has been sold. Many Bible institutes in America use the Scofield Reference as their study guide. With young men and women coming out of these institutions to fill our pulpits the teaching of a secret, pre-tribulational rapture has been widely promoted across the land.
A Bible conference was started in 1901 at Seacliff, Long Island, with a number of godly Bible teachers. It was here that the plan for the Scofield Reference Bible occurred to Dr. C. I. Scofield. However, it is interesting that a number of the teachers at this conference did not accept the views of the pre-tribulation rapture (which as mentioned were incorporated into the Scofield Reference Bible notes) or else accepted them and then later turned against those views--men such as Nathaniel West, A. J. Gordon, W. J. Erdman, Robert Aameron, Henry W. Frost, W. G. Moorehead, and Charles R. Eerdman.
W. J. Eerdman, who was for a while one of the strong proponents of the Pre-Trib theory, and one of the consulting editors of the Scofield Reference Bible wrote:
Should anyone deplore the adoption of the belief that the Lord will not come at anymoment, as if it would take away all the joy and comfort, it is enough to answer in the words of another, "Better the disappointment of truth than the fair but false promise of error." ("The Blessed Hope" p. 51, George E. Ladd).
Henry W. Frost after studying deeply into the matter wrote the following about the Pre-Trib teaching: "This view might still be held as truth if there were any Scripture to confirm it, but it may not be held, in view of the fact that no scripture even suggests such a process of events and many Scriptures positively contradict it." (Ibid. p. 58).
In the introduction to the Scofield Reference Bible, by Dr. C. I. Scofield, January 1, 1990, he said that modern study had helped to recover the "clear and coherent harmony of the predictive portions". He stated that the prophetic portion of the Bible was about one-fourth of the whole and hitherto "been closed to the average reader by fanciful and allegorical schemes of interpretation".
What is the Significance of All This?
What difference does it matter as to who taught what about all this? The significance in this matter lies in the fact that the origin of the embryo teaching of the Pre-tribulation Rapture teaching has been traced back to a book by Emmanuel Lacunza first published in 1812, and no further back than that. There is no trace of Jesus, Paul, Peter, or John teaching it. There is no trace of it in the Bible or hint of it by the early church fathers. It is important to note the development of this teaching to its present emphasis today, to understand how it first started, and to trace its emphasis through the various individuals mentioned in this discourse.
It is interesting how some of the modern-day-advocates of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture theory handle the fact that the theory is of such late origin. Dr. Harry Ironside said that the teachings of the second coming were neglected for many centuries, and then when they came to light there was a great confusion regarding the two-phases of the second coming.
Even John F. Walvoord, president of Dallas Theological Seminary and a foremost proponent of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture teaching, acknowledges that this view was "espoused" by J. N. Darby and his followers, and then made popular by the Scofield Reference Bible notes. He also acknowledged that the modern details of a Pre-Tribulation Rapture were not found in the early church fathers. (Hal Lindesy, author of, "The Late Great Planet Earth," is a graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary of which Dr. Walvoord was president). Yet Mr Ironside, talking about the Pre-Trib theory said this: "I know that the system I teach is full of holes, but I am to old and have written to many books to make any changes." (C. I. Scofield, "The Return of Christ in Relation to the Church). Bibliotheca Sacra CIX(1952), p. 5.
It seems that a number of men who have taught the Pre-Tribulation Rapture attribute the emphasis on it these last number of years as coming from a "clarifying", "defining", and "progressive refinement" of prophetic truth, but none of them show that this doctrine was taught at all prior to the early 1800's, and they give no sound Biblical basis for their belief.
We look askance at Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses, Armstrongism, etc., because we know they had their origins with false teachings thought up in modern days by their leaders. But how in the name of Bible truth can Christians still look with favor on Pre-Tribulation Rapturism, knowing where it got its start? Realize that this theory was never taught before 1812.
In fact I don't know of any book purporting Pre-Tribulationism that traces its beginnings as far back as Lacunza (1812). I hope what I have cited here will help sincere, honest Bible upholders in ascertaining the truth about the matter.
This teaching is not a recovery of truth once taught and then neglected. No, it never was taught--for 1800 years nearly no one knew anything about such a scheme.
How is it that all the early church fathers taught that Christians would go through he tribulation? Not a word regarding any Pre-Tribulation Rapture or Second Coming of Christ in two-stages. There is no mention of this until 1812 by a Catholic Priest who under an assumed Jewish Rabbi name wrote a book on it. Was the assumed Jewish Rabbi name to give his book more validity?
Oswald J. Smith, who was pastor of the great missionary-minded People's Church in Toronto, said that he used to believe in the Rapture before the tribulation, simply because it was taught by W. E. Blackstone in the book, "Jesus is Coming," the Scofield Reference Bible, at Prophetic Conferences and Bible Schools. He said that when He searched the Scriptures for himself, he found that there was not one single verse in the Bible that taught the pre-tribulation rapture, but that the Bible uniformly taught otherwise (that is, the church will go through the wrath of Antichrist, the great tribulation).
Will Meloon of Florida, said that he heard Charles E. Fuller, of the "Old Fashioned Revival Hour" radio fame many years ago, make the statement: "I do not know a single verse in the entire Bible which teaches a pre-tribulation rapture but I still believe it."
Through the years I have listened to many sermons, and read many books having to do with the Pre-Tribulation Rapture teaching. It is appalling and pathetic the large number of preachers who cannot adequately explain in detail from the Bible what they believe on the subject, and who are preaching the way they do simply because they have been taught that way all their lives, and come down hard against another alternative without biblically exploring it. They interpret the scriptures in light of what they believe instead of allowing the scriptures to formulate what they believe. They are true to the doctrines of denominations and of men at the expense of being true to the Word of God. The only determining factor with regard to prophecy is the Word of God, not some denominations viewpoint that they have cemented in stone that has no Biblical foundation.
The "secret pre-tribulation rapture" idea is being increasingly discarded by those who are "digging in", studying what the Bible actually teaches about the Second Coming of Christ and allowing the Scriptures to formulate what they believe instead of church affiliation.
It is important what the Bible teaches! And the Bible does not teach a Pre-Tribulation Rapture. But it does teach that before the Wrath of God is poured out during the Day of the Lord, (which will begin when the Great Tribulation is cut short for the elects sake) the believers will be raptured.
Truth stands in judgment of us, we never stand in judgment of truth!
If anyone has any evidence of the pre-trib theory prior to the 1800's please e-mail information to me. Thank you.
A most interesting and informative blog that you have. Am wondering if you are familiar with some of MacPherson's later works. His recent 300-page book "The Rapture Plot" (see Armageddon Books online for very low cost) is highly endorsed. And his many Google articles include "Pretrib Rapture Diehards," "X-Raying Margaret," "The Real Manuel Lacunza," "The Unoriginal John Darby," "Scholars Weigh My Research," "Deceiving and Being Deceived," and "Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty." He has stated that all of his book royalties have always gone to a nonprofit corporation which has never paid salary to anyone. BTW, his paternal grandfather George, who was born and raised in Nova Scotia, was for 25 years the director of the famed Tent Evangel Ministry in New York City which featured many leading evangelical speakers including Moody, Torrey, Scofield, etc. Lord bless you, Brother.
ReplyDeleteEdith