Darby and the Secret Rapture

[Zezima]

Originally Posted by Sons to Glory!

Since this older thread has been resurrected, I thought to add something regarding dispensationalism that we've discussed on another Christian forum I'm on in some length. Amillennialists purport that dispensationalism wasn't around before it was popularized in the 1800s. This is not the case. The idea can be found in many early church writers including Justin Martyr, Irenaeus and to a degree Augustine. But it seems that after the RCC firmly took over much of the church, amillennialism was the basic theme for over a thousand years.

See here: Dispensationalism And The Early Church Fathers

I’m going to politely object here. While early Church writers may have had flavors of what is now known today as dispensationalism, this theological system wasn’t a formal system until Darby. Darby defined the dispensations and presented how the Bible should be viewed through this theological system.

None of the early church writers or leaders that we know of used what is known as the dispensational framework to read the Bible . They (as noted in the article) saw different ways God interacted with man and commented on it, however they never formalized an entire system of biblical interpretation.

It’s important to point this out, because the Recovery will have you believe that this framework is something that has always existed, it’s a recovered truth. However, it simply isn’t and was formalized in the last 200 years. During my time in the recovery I never knew that there was other systems of biblical interpretation. I never knew that the recovery’s view of secret rapture was a fringe belief, I never knew that the recovery’s view of Israel being separate from the church was not a widely held belief.

While salvation doesn’t hinge on what theological system you use, a lot of other beliefs do. Specifically eschatology, the only way certain end time beliefs work is if they are viewed through specific theological system lenses. When beliefs about the end times dictate a huge portion of your Christian life (being an over comer, secret rapture) it’s good practice to understand where that lens comes from. With the Lords Recovery, it’s a lens that is relatively new in the grand scheme of things.

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Zezima

I’m going to politely object here. While early Church writers may have had flavors of what is now known today as dispensationalism, this theological system wasn’t a formal system until Darby. Darby defined the dispensations and presented how the Bible should be viewed through this theological system.

Instead of saying Darby was the Father of Dispensationalism, some say he was actually the father of systematized dispensationalism. That may be a more accurate moniker.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Zezima

I’m going to politely object here. While early Church writers may have had flavors of what is now known today as dispensationalism, this theological system wasn’t a formal system until Darby. Darby defined the dispensations and presented how the Bible should be viewed through this theological system.

While salvation doesn’t hinge on what theological system you use, a lot of other beliefs do. Specifically eschatology, the only way certain end time beliefs work is if they are viewed through specific theological system lenses. When beliefs about the end times dictate a huge portion of your Christian life (being an over comer, secret rapture) it’s good practice to understand where that lens comes from. With the Lords Recovery, it’s a lens that is relatively new in the grand scheme of things.

Zezima, it seems that you oppose all Biblical teachings just because JND, WN, or WL used it. The reason many embrace elements of "Dispensationalism" is because it does have some value to help our understanding of the scriptures. Of course, as Sons to Glory alludes to, all teaching paradigms or systems can be taken to extremes, and go beyond the limits of scripture. Hyper Calvinistic teachings also come to mind here. Pentecostal teachings are another by their equating all mentions of Spirit/spirit with tongues.

I believe it's far better to examine each teaching, i.e. "test all things, hold on to the good,"as the Apostle admonishes us. Otherwise we end up discarding the good with the bad just because we abhor one particular messenger or system. And let's be fair that Dispensationalism is not the only teaching system prone to errors or extremes. Better to be like the Bereans who examined all teachings with the Word of God.

Regardless of what Darby or others teach, the entire Bible, and Revelations chapters 2-3 in particular, provide numerous blessings upon those who "overcome." Jesus' own Sermon on the Mount also provides unique blessings to those who "overcome" for lack of a better word. Paul's faith stories in Hebrews 11 list numerous accounts of specific men who overcame by faith.

I do agree with you that there is no privileged class of believers called "overcomers," rather this word is always used as an action of faith and obedience to the Lord during those trials His believers are confronted with. For any sect, such as the Recovery versions, to label their adherents alone as "overcomers" is a horrible deception.

There are also numerous verses on the (secret) rapture. Do you oppose them too?

[Ohio]

It would be nice to see aron also respond here. It's been awhile since we have seen him. I sure hope all is well with him.

[Zezima]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Zezima, it seems that you oppose all Biblical teachings just because JND, WN, or WL used it. The reason many embrace elements of "Dispensationalism" is because it does have some value to help our understanding of the scriptures. Of course, as Sons to Glory alludes to, all teaching paradigms or systems can be taken to extremes, and go beyond the limits of scripture. Hyper Calvinistic teachings also come to mind here. Pentecostal teachings are another by their equating all mentions of Spirit/spirit with tongues.

There are also numerous verses on the (secret) rapture. Do you oppose them too?

It’s hard for me now to agree with any biblical teaching that first requires you to put on a special pair of glasses in order for it to make sense. A lot of the biblical teachings outside the matters of the faith in the Lord’s Recovery are only “biblical” through a specific pair of glasses, in this case dispensationalism.

They will give entire conferences on topics like “the man child” or “to be an overcomer to bring back god” or entire messages on the “secret rapture”. They’ll say “the second coming is near because Israel is now a national state!” “A missile will soon hit the temple on the mount, and the end will be begin!”

However, these beliefs are dependent on a pair of glasses that are pretty new in the entire history of the Christian church. While I’m not saying dispensationalism is wrong, it’s important to make note that this system is new in the scope of Christian history.

For the longest time while I was in the Lord’s Recovery I had a hard time believing a secret rapture, and chalked it up to me “not having the vision”. Then one day I discovered that it’s not a doctrine that’s existed throughout church history, that it stems from a theological system that’s only 200ish years old, and the majority of Christianity doesn’t even hold it to be true. Wait a second, there’s other systems for interpreting the Bible that don’t differ in matters of the faith? There’s other views on how the end times will play out?

That’s what my understanding of this thread is, pointing out the pair of glasses the recovery uses to interpret the Bible. More so, that these glasses are relatively new.

About the secret rapture, I’m referring to the recovery’s view that a group gets left behind and some are taken. This is something I just don’t find biblical evidence for.

[Bible-believer]

1Co 9:17

For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.

Eph 1:10

That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:

Eph 3:2

If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:

Col 1:25

Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;

[OBW]

Originally Posted by Bible-believer

1Co 9:17

For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the gospel is committed unto me.

Eph 1:10

That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:

Eph 3:2

If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:

Col 1:25

Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;

Odd that despite the appearance of the word "dispensation" in whatever version of the bible you are using (KJV?), I cannot discover that the use of the word is in any way meant to imply some unifying method of understanding the whole of the scripture, but rather an alternative way of saying something else (that other versions say much more clearly). For example, in 1 Cor 9, "dispensation" is not a magical word, but rather part of a more archaic way of saying that Paul was given a charge (to preach the gospel). Not to understand "dispensation" as some kind of overarching principle of everything.

Of all the ways that each of these passages could have been worded (both in the time of King James and today) and we latch onto one of them has defining doctrine that the alternatives would suggest was never even imagined by the translators.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by Zezima

It’s hard for me now to agree with any biblical teaching that first requires you to put on a special pair of glasses in order for it to make sense. A lot of the biblical teachings outside the matters of the faith in the Lord’s Recovery are only “biblical” through a specific pair of glasses, in this case dispensationalism.

I agree. And that's why I have discarded the systems of theology in order to return to the scriptures. I suggest you do a basic word study, for example, study every verse in the NT that includes the word "overcome."

[Sons to Glory!]

Originally Posted by Ohio

I agree. And that's why I have discarded the systems of theology in order to return to the scriptures. I suggest you do a basic word study, for example, study every verse in the NT that includes the word "overcome."

Thumbs up sign!