Revelation: A Cyclical View

Chaps · Apr 20, 2024

I appreciate the post. I did read the post previously but didn’t notice the additional link at the bottom that mentioned the Morgan Edwards writings. It does seem that he posits a rapture and return of Christ with the Church after 3.5 years. While I suppose that technically, this does ”split” the time of the rapture, it still isn’t describing what Darby and McDonald refer to when they discuss the rapture.

In my opinion, after reading the material, there is a reason the authors I quoted refer to the first account of the “secret rapture” occurring in the 1830s. Perhaps others spoke of a separation in time at the Second Coming (which I will concede that Robert Norton who transcribed her vision was inaccurate about this being the first separation account), this is very different from the notion that Christ would come and only be seen by the Church. That is what is referred to by the “secret rapture.” The entire “left behind” notion is the idea that Christ’s Second Coming is invisible. That is what is spoken of by the vision of the young girl and the eschatological stance of Darby. So, I still stand by my statement that “no one ever conceived of a ‘secret rapture’ prior to the 1800s” and I find it striking that Darby’s views mirror this concept from the girl’s vision.

Yet, I think we are missing the forest from the trees. My original point was that this eschatological view was completely foreign to the Church for 1800 years. So even if we say there were some earlier elements in the 1700s, I think it is striking that no one for 1700 years ever looked at the biblical text and interpreted the Second Coming in this way. It doesn’t mean it’s wrong, but I just think it is odd that people will act as if my interpretation of Revelation is so foreign when no Christian for 17 centuries ever understood the book the way most who dismiss my views so harshly.

ewq1938 · Apr 20, 2024

Naturally the first known belief that the rapture could happen before the trib wouldn't have everything now attributed to the doctrine. People misunderstanding Paul was the first example of a pre-trib rapture.

Chaps said:

It existed long before then.

http://www.essentialchristianity.com/21918

"At the time of the Protestant Reformation a major shift in how one interpreted the Bible caused the church to adjust in her views on the end times. Predominately under the Roman Catholic Church the Bible was interpreted allegorically. Scripture dealing with end times, prophetic texts, for the most part suffered from the hands of those who would not take the text literally. However, as the Reformation grew and as people began to return to a literal interpretation of the Bible the more people shifted to see that Christ was going to come back to earth to rule and reign. Many of the Puritans and Pilgrims, the 2nd generation of the Reformation movement, adopted the idea that not only was Christ going to reign on the earth but he would also translate his church saints before the awful time of his outpouring of wrath. Several of these scholars in some form or another held to a pre-tribulational rapture position.

1. Joseph Mede (1627): Clavis Apocalyptica

Some believe that he in this work made a distinction between the rapture of the saints in contrast to the second of Christ to earth.

2. Increase Mather (1639-1723)

Increase Mather was a pastor, scholar, and was the first President of Harvard College. Paul Boyer has noted that this Puritan scholar proved "that the saints would be caught up into the air beforehand, thereby escaping the final conflagration." This teaching from Mather was an early formulation of the rapture doctrine it seems.

3. Peter Jurieu (1687)

Peter Jurie in his book "Approaching Deliverance of the Church " (1687) taught that Christ would come in the air to rapture the saints and return to heaven before the battle of Armageddon. He spoke of a secret Rapture prior to His coming in glory and judgment at Armageddon.

4. John Gill (1748)

Dr. John Gill was one of the most brilliant scholars of his day. This Calvinist Baptist theologian wrote a full commentary set on the Bible in 1748. In this commentary he made a statement in his notes on 1 Thessalonians 4 that supported a time difference between the rapture of the saints and the coming of Christ to earth. He said:

....here Christ will stop and will be visible to all, and as easily discerned by all, good and bad, as the body of the sun at noon-day; as yet He will not descend on earth, because it is not fit to receive Him; but when that and its works are burnt up, and it is purged and purified by fire, and become a new earth, He'll descend upon it, and dwell with his saints in it: and this suggests another reason why He'll stay in the air, and His saints shall meet Him there, and whom He'll take up with Him into the third heaven, till the general conflagration and burning of the world is over, and to preserve them from it....

5. Morgan Edwards (1742-1744) the Founder of Brown University

Edwards was a prominent Baptist Leader in his day. When he came to America he was recommended to a pastoral role by the famous John Gill. He founded the first Baptist College in the colonies. This college later became known as Brown University, a well known Ivy League University of our times. Edwards taught that Christ would return for his church saints 3.5 years before he returned to establish the Kingdom of Christ on earth, the 1000 year reign of Christ. He specifically said:

"The distance between the first and second resurrection will be somewhat more than a thousand years. I say, somewhat more--, because the dead saints will be raised, and the living changed at Christ's 'appearing in the air' (1 Thess. 4:17); and this will be about three years and a half before the millennium, as we shall see hereafter: but will he and they abide in the air all that time? No: they will ascend to paradise, or to some one of those many 'mansions in the Father's house' (John 14:2).""

Chaps · Apr 21, 2024

ewq1938 said:

Naturally the first known belief that the rapture could happen before the trib wouldn't have everything now attributed to the doctrine. People misunderstanding Paul was the first example of a pre-trib rapture.

It existed long before then.

http://www.essentialchristianity.com/21918

"At the time of the Protestant Reformation a major shift in how one interpreted the Bible caused the church to adjust in her views on the end times. Predominately under the Roman Catholic Church the Bible was interpreted allegorically. Scripture dealing with end times, prophetic texts, for the most part suffered from the hands of those who would not take the text literally. However, as the Reformation grew and as people began to return to a literal interpretation of the Bible the more people shifted to see that Christ was going to come back to earth to rule and reign. Many of the Puritans and Pilgrims, the 2nd generation of the Reformation movement, adopted the idea that not only was Christ going to reign on the earth but he would also translate his church saints before the awful time of his outpouring of wrath. Several of these scholars in some form or another held to a pre-tribulational rapture position.

1. Joseph Mede (1627): Clavis Apocalyptica

Some believe that he in this work made a distinction between the rapture of the saints in contrast to the second of Christ to earth.

2. Increase Mather (1639-1723)

Increase Mather was a pastor, scholar, and was the first President of Harvard College. Paul Boyer has noted that this Puritan scholar proved "that the saints would be caught up into the air beforehand, thereby escaping the final conflagration." This teaching from Mather was an early formulation of the rapture doctrine it seems.

3. Peter Jurieu (1687)

Peter Jurie in his book "Approaching Deliverance of the Church " (1687) taught that Christ would come in the air to rapture the saints and return to heaven before the battle of Armageddon. He spoke of a secret Rapture prior to His coming in glory and judgment at Armageddon.

4. John Gill (1748)

Dr. John Gill was one of the most brilliant scholars of his day. This Calvinist Baptist theologian wrote a full commentary set on the Bible in 1748. In this commentary he made a statement in his notes on 1 Thessalonians 4 that supported a time difference between the rapture of the saints and the coming of Christ to earth. He said:

....here Christ will stop and will be visible to all, and as easily discerned by all, good and bad, as the body of the sun at noon-day; as yet He will not descend on earth, because it is not fit to receive Him; but when that and its works are burnt up, and it is purged and purified by fire, and become a new earth, He'll descend upon it, and dwell with his saints in it: and this suggests another reason why He'll stay in the air, and His saints shall meet Him there, and whom He'll take up with Him into the third heaven, till the general conflagration and burning of the world is over, and to preserve them from it....

5. Morgan Edwards (1742-1744) the Founder of Brown University

Edwards was a prominent Baptist Leader in his day. When he came to America he was recommended to a pastoral role by the famous John Gill. He founded the first Baptist College in the colonies. This college later became known as Brown University, a well known Ivy League University of our times. Edwards taught that Christ would return for his church saints 3.5 years before he returned to establish the Kingdom of Christ on earth, the 1000 year reign of Christ. He specifically said:

"The distance between the first and second resurrection will be somewhat more than a thousand years. I say, somewhat more--, because the dead saints will be raised, and the living changed at Christ's 'appearing in the air' (1 Thess. 4:17); and this will be about three years and a half before the millennium, as we shall see hereafter: but will he and they abide in the air all that time? No: they will ascend to paradise, or to some one of those many 'mansions in the Father's house' (John 14:2).""

Look, you can post til your blue in the face, but the fact of the matter is NO reader of the Bible ever had the notion that Jesus would come secretly and no one would see him but the Church. Nor did anyone ever believe that God needed to rapture the Church away in order to refocus his attention on Israel to fulfill prophecies that Christ failed to accomplish at his first coming. You can act as if the entire Church was apostate for 1800 years until Darby introduced Dispensationalism, or try to shoehorn earlier writings into that position, but that is simply not the case. I dont see this conversation going anywhere at this point. We will simply have to agree to disagree.

If you’d like to engage in the actual focus of this thread or show how you think the actual text of Revelation supports a Dispensational Premillenial view, I’d be happy to discuss it. But arguing that the Church was corrupt for most of her history and no one knew how to interpret the Bible for 17 centuries is a pointless debate in my opinion. Clearly you have your mind made up on the matter so there is no point arguing about it.

TheDivineWatermark · Apr 21, 2024

^ @Chaps , FYI "ewq1938" (member) is not arguing for a pre-trib rapture, as he himself believes the rapture occurs at the time of Christ's Second Coming (Rev19 time-slot).

He is simply supplying "information" from various points in history (before 1830) about what others believed and wrote about concerning a distinction [time-wise] between the two: "our rapture [in the air]" and Christ's Second Coming to the earth.

He supplied his OWN viewpoint (on "rapture-timing") in a earlier post in this very thread (that viewpoint of his being that the rapture occurs at His Second Coming--I disagree with him on that point, as I said before)

TheDivineWatermark · Apr 21, 2024

Chaps said:

Right, Morgan Edwards (publishing in 1744) perceived a distinction in the timing between "our Rapture" and "Christ's Second Coming"...

... whereas Darby came to perceive a "pre-TRIB [or pre-70th Week]" rapture;

...and M. MacDonald, in her supposed "vision" described a "POST-trib" rapture (with the Church GOING THROUGH the Trib yrs).
Their views were different. M. MacDonald was a disciple of E. Irving (an Historicist), who, according to many, was the originator of the specific term "SECRET rapture" (but he was not a "pre-trib-rapture" proponent--nor was MM).

__________

I'm still unsure which concept is really at root of your issue:

--the specific TERM "SECRET rapture"; or

--the idea of "our Rapture [in the air]" and "His Second Coming [to the earth]" occurring at WHOLLY DISTINCT time-slots

??

Chaps · Apr 21, 2024

TheDivineWatermark said:

Ok, well perhaps I misunderstood his position. I have been responding to a lot of people so it is hard to keep track of who believes what. He did quote this as factual which is why I inferred as much:

The clear implication of this citation is that the church “suffered” throughout history of people who didn’t know how to interpret the Bible. First, I dont think this is altogether true. Certainly there was a large segment of early church theologians and theologians throughout the history of the church that embraced allegory. However, there were plenty of Christians who held to a Historical Premillenial view of Revelation that was not based in allegory. Moreover, there were others who held an Amillennial view of Revelation that also did not utilize allegory as a means of understanding the text. Interpreting something symbolically and interpreting it allegorically is not the same thing. Someone can see the millennium as a symbolic number without engaging in allegory.

Anyway, I just cringe at the notion that no one knew how to understand prophecy for AT LEAST 1600 years and possibly 1800 years (depending on how staunch the Dispensationalist is). So, to be clear, the issue I have with the post is it implies that 1) the church was unable to understand significant portions of the Bible for most of her history and 2) it misses the point I was making that the “secret rapture” doctrine did not begin until the 1800s. Even if different ideas about the second coming happening in various stages began earlier, the idea that a secret, unbeknownst to anyone but the Church, coming of Jesus would happen and take all believers off the earth, leaving the rest of the world confused and unaware Jesus had returned was not a doctrine known to the Church until the 1830s.

Chaps · Apr 21, 2024

TheDivineWatermark said:

Ok, allow me to clarify. The Church throughout history has believed in a literal, visible Second Coming of Jesus that would be seen by every eye and mourned/celebrated by the whole world. Now, it seems, perhaps some in the 1700s or so started to suggest that Christians would be “caught up“ to be with Jesus in the air for a while (years?) to be judged before his ultimate return to reign on earth.

However, the doctrine of a “secret rapture” is altogether different. The notion of the “secret rapture” is that Jesus will not be seen by the whole world. He will only be seen by Christians. And those Christians will be taken off the earth while the rest of the world is “left behind.” The purpose of this “secret rapture,” according to Dispensationalists, is to remove the Church from the world so that a new dispensation can be ushered in where God can focus on fulfilling unfulfilled promises to Israel. Thus, the Church is merely a parenthesis in history and not the main plot in God’s redemption story. Israel is the main plot and the purpose of Jesus coming and secretly rapturing believers off the earth is to refocus God’s attention on national Israel.

So, this notion that Jesus‘ Second Coming was not a moment of final judgment where the whole earth would see him….but was a quiet, secret appearing that would later be followed by a Third Coming that WOULD be seen by the world when Jesus comes to save Israel from destruction and set up his millennial reign is an entirely new concept that no one reading Revelation for 1800 years had ever contemplated. The primarily reason for this is that most of the Church saw themselves as the focus of God’s redemptive plans and that the tribes of Israel in Revelation consisted of believers…both Jews and Gentiles.

Chaps · Apr 21, 2024

TheDivineWatermark said:

I think this is where the confusion is setting in. What Darby meant by “rapture” is very different from what Edwards meant. Edwards simply meant that we would be “caught up” with Jesus as 1 Thess 4 indicates. However, he was not teaching that this would be an invisible event to the world that was only the spiritual Christian would see.

And that is where the rub is with the girl’s vision and Darby. I think the pre-trib, post-trib is just obfuscating the point. The girl’s vision indicated that Christ’s return would only be visible to Christians. It doesn’t matter if she saw it as “post-trib.” For her, it was an invisible event to the world only seen by Christians. Likewise, right after this vision, Darby’s Dispensational view posited a “secret rapture” by which only Christians would see Jesus and they would vanish from the world who would not see Jesus’ Second Coming. So the idea that Darby could not have gotten this idea from their girl because she mentioned a post-trib event and he believed in a pre-trib event is inconsequential. No eschatology taught that the Second Coming of Christ was a secret event only seen by Christians until pushed out by this charismatic movement that also just happened to become integrated into Darby’s eschatology. I guess someone could argue that it is coincidental and Darby did not get the idea of a secret rapture from this other movement, but that seems highly unlikely to me.

ewq1938 · Apr 21, 2024

Chaps said:

But many did in Paul's time misunderstand him and think a rapture coming could happen at any time like a thief in the night. It is the earliest notion of a Pre-trib rapture. Through time many other people taught similar things, all having in common a rapture before the trib started. It's an old and incorrect doctrine that existed long before the 1830's.

TheDivineWatermark · Apr 21, 2024

ewq1938 said:

The thing that arrives "as a thief IN THE NIGHT" is the (earthly-located) TIME-PERIOD [not "our Rapture [in the air]"], and the Thessalonians "KNEW[/KNOW] PERFECTLY" this fact (per 1Th5:1-3), as Paul readily acknowledged of them, and said he had no need to write them regarding it.

Also, the false claim in 2Th2:2 that Paul was cautioning them about, spoke NOTHING concerning "rapture" (there is NO EVIDENCE whatsoever that the false claimants even knew or were aware of such a doctrine [of 'rapture'] at all, and Paul doesn't specify that they did or that the false claim's content expressed [or could ever express] info regarding "rapture")... the false claim simply entailed/entails "[purporting] that IS PRESENT [PERFECT indicative; TRANSITIVE verb] the day of the Lord [a TIME-PERIOD unfolding upon the EARTH]"
(it/the false claim [v.2] has ZERO to do with "rapture [IN THE AIR]");
Paul is saying that is NOT SO [i.e. it is NOT present] (and explains WHY).

TheDivineWatermark · Apr 21, 2024

"A transitive verb must have a direct object"... and the way this verse 2 is written in the Greek, the verb [G1764] DOES have "a direct object" ['the day of the Lord']:

-- https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/2th/2/2/t_concf_1118002

-- https://biblehub.com/interlinear/2_thessalonians/2-2.htm

TheDivineWatermark · Apr 21, 2024

Chaps said:

The thing is, Darby believed "the Second Coming of Christ" is when "EVERY EYE SHALL SEE HIM" (not that THIS was somehow "secret" as you seem to be suggesting was his view).

ewq1938 · Apr 21, 2024

TheDivineWatermark said:

But the rapture is known as a gathering to Christ, who comes to meet them so the passage is definitely about the rapture.

2Th 2:1 Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2Th 2:2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.

Chaps · Apr 21, 2024

ewq1938 said:

I am not rejecting the idea that the Second Coming could happen at any moment and that this is what the early church believed. Darby’s “secret rapture” is nothing like the Second Coming Paul describes. Jesus discusses his Second Coming as a moment that will be seen by everyone. Paul discusses the Second Coming as a moment in which will be preceded by the “voice of the Archangel and the trumpet call of God.” It is clearly an event that is incredibly audible and visible to the entire world and is immediately followed by judgment of the wicked.

Darby‘s “secret rapture“ is not a worldly visible and audible event that results in the salvation of the righteous and judgment of the wicked. It is a “secret” Second Coming that is only visible by believers in which Jesus “raptures” the church off the world, leaving the wicked behind and completely unaware that Jesus had returned.

TheDivineWatermark · Apr 21, 2024

Chaps said:

yes, and in my Post #99 of this thread, I mentioned that Irenaeus (100's) ALSO "split" the timing of our Rapture and the [distinct] timing of His Second Coming to the earth...or, rather, he perceived Scripture to be conveying such.

(and as I understand it, many way back in that time [even in the 1700's] considered there ONLY to be a 3.5-yr period for what we label the tribulation period, so technically, when they said 3.5 yrs separated the two distinct events, they thus considered the "rapture" AS BEING [what we label] "pre-Trib"--i.e. rapture before the tribulation period commences)

Chaps said:

I disagree that the 1700's was the first time anyone in Church history ever viewed it this way, as "split" [...see again my comment at the top of this post

]

Chaps · Apr 21, 2024

TheDivineWatermark said:

I think you need to do more research on Darby’s Dispensational Premillennial view.

When God is ready to restart his postponed program for the Jews, he will begin the countdown for the second coming of Jesus in a very dramatic way. This could happen at literally any moment, since there are no special conditions that must precede it. What is this dramatic, any-moment event? It is the secret rapture of all Christians out of the earth. This coincides with Christ’s first second coming (second coming #1), which itself will be secret and invisible from the standpoint of earth’s normal activities. This event is called the parousia, the coming or presence of Christ. All at once, in some unexpected moment, all living Christians will suddenly disappear (evaporate, in a sense) from this world and will instantly receive their glorified bodies. They will then join all previously dead Christians, who have just been raised from the dead in their new bodies in what is called the first resurrection; then all will be taken up together to meet their Savior, who has returned for them to take them up to heaven. All Christians, now glorified, will then stand before the judgment seat of Christ (2 Cor 5:10) for the assignment of their rewards. Then as the bride of Christ they will join their Bridegroom for a seven-year wedding feast (Rev 19:7–9), which takes place in heaven.
What is the purpose of this secret rapture? Why does God suddenly remove all Christians from this world? There are two reasons. First, God has no more use for the church upon the earth. It has served its purpose; the halftime events are over. God is now ready to resume the real game, where the main players are the Jews (physical Israel). Second, the next seven years of earth’s history are about to be filled with some of the greatest suffering the world has ever witnessed, most of it the result of Satan’s attacks on the people of God. In an act of untold mercy God removes the church from the world just so it will not have to go through the “great tribulation.” Thus this view is called pretribulational premillennialism.

Chaps · Apr 21, 2024

TheDivineWatermark said:

yes, and in my Post #99 of this thread, I mentioned that Irenaeus (100's) ALSO "split" the timing of our Rapture and the [distinct] timing of His Second Coming to the earth...or, rather, he perceived Scripture to be conveying such.

(and as I understand it, many way back in that time [even in the 1700's] considered there ONLY to be a 3.5-yr period for what we label the tribulation period, so technically, when they said 3.5 yrs separated the two distinct events, they thus considered the "rapture" AS BEING [what we label] "pre-Trib"--i.e. rapture before the tribulation period commences)

I disagree that the 1700's was the first time anyone in Church history ever viewed it this way, as "split" [...see again my comment at the top of this post

]

So you are suggesting Darby was not the first one to come up with Dispensationalism and the secret rapture of the church?

ewq1938 · Apr 21, 2024

Chaps said:

They did not believe that because it is not scriptural.

Nehemiah6 · Apr 21, 2024

ewq1938 said:

Correct. Revelation 1:7 and many other passages show that the Second Coming of Christ will be known worldwide before it happens. Indeed all the cataclysmic cosmic events which have been prophesied will occur first. So here is what is revealed: Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. (Mt 24:29-31)
Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen. (Rev 1:7)

This is in marked contrast to the Resurrection/Rapture of which the world will not be aware.

Chaps · Apr 21, 2024

ewq1938 said:

Okay. I guess that settles it then.

Revelation: A Cyclical View

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Active member

Active member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Active member

Well-known member

Active member

Active member

Well-known member

Senior Member

Active member