John Nelson Darby vs Baptist Confessions of Faith

[OldRegular]

Most if not all the Confessions of English Baptists, first in Holland where they had been driven by persecution, and later in England teach a general resurrection and judgment at the return of Jesus Christ. There is no mention of any “snatching away” of the Saints prior to any tribulation. These Baptists experienced tribulation. Jesus Christ promised that HIS redeemed would experience tribulation. All the Confessions of these early English Baptists, from which most Baptist Churches in this country come, precede the new revelation of John Nelson Darby by 150-200 years!

Sadly many if not most Baptists in this country have ignored the Biblical truths of these Confessions, including the Philadelphia and New Hampshire Confessions, and have adopted the new revelation of John Nelson Darby, called pre-trib-dispensationalism. This Darby doctrine is not only unBiblical in its eschatology but even worse concludes that the Church for which Jesus Christ died is a “parenthesis, an interruption, in GOD’s program for ethnic Israel!

 

[OldRegular]

{Note: the 1644 statement is from http://www.oldschoolbaptist.org/Articles/1644LondonConfessionOfFaith.htm; the rest of the statements are from Lumpkin’s Baptist Confessions of Faith which omits the statement from the 1644/1646 Confession!}

THE LONDON CONFESSION OF 1644/46

Article LII.

There shall be a resurrection of the dead, both of the just and unjust, and everyone shall give an account of himself to God, that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad.


THE MIDLAND ASSOCIATION CONFESSION [1655]

Article 16 [page 200].

“That at the time appointed of the Lord, the dead bodies of all men, just and unjust shall rise out of their graves, that all may receive according to what they have done in their bodies, be it good or evil.”


THE SOMERSET CONFESSION [1656]

Article XL [page 214]

“That there is a day appointed, when the Lord shall raise the unjust as well as the righteous, and judge them all in righteousness, but every man in his own order, taking vengeance on them that know not God, and obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ, whose punishment will be everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord.”


THE STANDARD CONFESSION [1660]

Article XX [page 231]

“That there shall be [through Christ who was dead but is alive again from the dead] a Resurrection of all men from the graves of the earth, both the just and the unjust, that is, the fleshly bodies of men, sown into the graves of the earth, corruptible, dishonourable, weak, natural, [which so considered cannot inherit the Kingdom of God] shall be raised again, incorruptible, in glory, in power, spiritual, and so considered, the bodies of the Saints [united again to their spirits] which here suffer for Christ, shall inherit the Kingdom, reigning together with Christ.”

Article XXI [page 231]

“That there shall be after the Resurrection from the graves of the earth, An eternal Judgment, at the appearing of Christ and His Kingdom, at which time of judgment which is unalterable, and irrevocable, every man shall receive according to the things done in his body.”


The SECOND LONDON CONFESSION [1677]

Chapter XXXI. Of the State of Man after Death and of the Resurrection of the Dead [page 293]

“1. The Bodies of Men after Death return to dust and see corruption; but their souls [which neither die nor sleep] having an immortal subsistence, immediately return to God who gave them; the Souls of the righteous then being made perfect in holiness, are received into Paradise where they are with Christ, and behold the face of God in light and glory; waiting for the full redemption of their bodies; and the souls of the wicked, are cast into hell; where they remain in torment and utter darkness, reserved to the judgment of the great day; besides these two places for Souls separated from their bodies, the Scripture acknowledgeth none.

2. At the last day such of the Saints as are found alive shall not sleep but shall be changed; and all the dead shall be raised up with the self same bodies, and none other; although with different qualities, which shall be reunited with their Souls again forever.

3. The bodies of the unjust shall by the power of Christ be raised to dishonour; the bodies of the just by His Spirit unto honour, and be made conformable to His own glorious body.”


Chapter XXXII. Of the Last Judgment [page 294]

“1. God hath appointed a Day wherein He will judge the world in Righteousness, by Jesus Christ; to Whom all power and judgment is given of the Father; in which Day not only the Apostate Angels shall be judged; but likewise all persons that have lived upon the Earth, shall appear before the tribunal of Christ; to give an account of their thoughts, Words, and Deeds, and to receive according to what they have done in the body, whether good or evil.

2. The end of Gods appointing this Day is for the manifestation of the glory of His Mercy, in the Eternal Salvation of the Elect, and of His Justice in the Eternal damnation of the Reprobate who are wicked and disobedient; for then shall the Righteous go into everlasting life, and receive the fullness of Joy, and Glory, with everlasting reward in the presence of the Lord; but the wicked who know not God, and obey not the Gospel of Jesus Christ, shall be cast into Eternal torments, and punished with everlasting destruction, from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of His power.

3. As Christ would have us to be certainly persuaded that there shall be a Day of judgment, both to deter all men from sin and for greater consolation of the godly, in their adversity; so will he have that day unknown to Men, that they may shake off all carnal security, and be always watchful, because they know not at what hour, the Lord will come; and may ever be prepared to say, Come Lord Jesus, Come quickly, Amen.”

 

[sag38]

Good grief brother!! Can you not find another ax to grind? It's as if you yourself aren't sure and in a pathological way you are trying to get some type of sick justification for your position.

 

[OldRegular]

Good grief brother!! Can you not find another ax to grind? It's as if you yourself aren't sure and in a pathological way you are trying to get some type of sick justification for your position.

I would ask first if you have made a similar comment regarding the many threads started by dispensationalists on this BB!

Much of the Bible is devoted to pointing out sin and error among the people of GOD. Pre-trib-dispensationalism is a grievous unBiblical error invented by John Nelson Darby who claimed new revelation so I am obligated to make that point when I can. When a doctrine calls the Church, for which Jesus Christ shed HIS blood, a "parenthesis" in GOD's program for ethnic Israel that is blasphemous to me and should be to every Christian!

 

[kyredneck]

There's some excellent points made in this piece:

The Ninety-Five Theses Against Dispensationalism

 

[DHK]

There's some excellent points made in this piece:

The Ninety-Five Theses Against Dispensationalism

Don't have the time or patience to read it all.
But like the piece that OR posted in the other thread by "Tommie Spurgeon," he probably has a lot of misinformation and wrongly characterizes dispensatonalism. That usually is the case. It certainly was with Tommie Spurgeon going out of his way to defend his father, even when he was wrong.

As I pointed out earlier, the pre-mill stance is historical dating back to the Apostles. The Waldenses and all the other evangelical groups that opposed Rome from the that time onward believed in premillennialism or dispensationalism as we know it. Even on this board there are some that are pre-trib, mid-trib, and post-trib. The fact remains that all were pre-mil.
Those who were unorthodox in their doctrine took a stand outside of the pre-mill position. And that is what history shows us.

 

[OldRegular]

There's some excellent points made in this piece:

The Ninety-Five Theses Against Dispensationalism

Thanks Brother. As much as I have looked for that type of Summary of the False Doctrine of pre-trib-dispensationalism I have not found it. The sad truth is that most pre-trib-dispensationalists will neither read it or believe it. If they reject the clear teaching of Scripture and embrace the unBiblical "new revelation" of Darby there is no way they will accept the truth. There are none so blind as those who will not see and the Rapture-Ready people will not see! DHK has already shown that!

 

[DHK]

Thanks Brother. As much as I have looked for that type of Summary of the False Doctrine of pre-trib-dispensationalism I have not found it. The sad truth is that most pre-trib-dispensationalists will neither read it or believe it. If they reject the clear teaching of Scripture and embrace the unBiblical "new revelation" of Darby there is no way they will accept the truth. There are none so blind as those who will not see and the Rapture-Ready people will not see! DHK has already shown that!

What is it OR? You can't post the truth.
Using "Tommie Spurgeon" you posted a mass of misinformation. There wasn't much truth about dispensationalism, premillennialism or even pretribulationalism there. It was written by someone with a chip on his shoulder and with a martyr-complex. He was totally misinformed, and you haven't bothered to answer any objections. You are probably very embarrassed about it.

 

[OldRegular]

What is it OR? You can't post the truth.
Using "Tommie Spurgeon" you posted a mass of misinformation. There wasn't much truth about dispensationalism, premillennialism or even pretribulationalism there. It was written by someone with a chip on his shoulder and with a martyr-complex. He was totally misinformed, and you haven't bothered to answer any objections. You are probably very embarrassed about it.

I never get embarrassed about what I post. You may not like what "Tommie Spurgeon" wrote but I also presented information from Charles Spurgeon showing that Darby's beliefs about the atonement of Jesus Christ was heretical in that he believed that the suffering of Jesus Christ was; Well I will just present it one more time:

Mr. Darby maintains that a part of Christ’s sufferings on the cross, were what he calls ‘non-atoning,’ that is, that in ‘smiting’ him as the shepherd on the cross, God did not do so with a view to an atonement for our sins, until a particular point of time, while Christ was hanging on the tree, and that then the wrath of God, in its atoning character, coalesced with his legal wrath.

In association with the doctrine that much of the sufferings of Christ on the cross were without any atoning object or effect, Mr. Darby, advancing a step farther, denies that the atonement for our sins consisted even in Christ’s death. But as it is probable some persons will find it difficult to believe that any man, professing to hold evangelical principles, and especially the leader of an important religious sect, also professing to be sound in the faith, could entertain such notions, and that I must have misunderstood Mr. Darby’s meaning—it is due to him, and may be desirable for the reader, that I should quote his own words. They are given, in substance the same as in his monthly organ, ‘The Present Testimony,’ for August, 1866, a later date than that in which his other publication, ‘The Sufferings of Christ,‘ made its appearance, and, therefore, notwithstanding all the remonstrances addressed to him by some of his followers against that dreadful doctrine, they are proved to have been without effect. He then stands before the religious world as still adhering to these fearful doctrines:—

‘There was, too, to him,’ says Mr. Darby, ‘in addition to the pain of the death, the legal curse appended, by God’s righteous judgment as King of Israel, to the form of the death; as it is written, ‘Cursed is every one that hangeth upon a tree.’ But this curse of the law was not the same thing as the wrath, when he cried out, ‘My God, my God, why has thou forsaken me?’ The thieves bore it as he did; that thief, too, who went with him to paradise the same day, and who could go there to be with his Lord, because he, the Prince of Life, had borne the wrath due to sin in his own body on the tree. But the cross had been endured by many an unrepentant rebel against man and God; and the cross in itself would not take away sin. Yea, more, while the time in which he endured the cross was the period in part of which the wrath came on him (when he endured the wrath of God’s judgment against sin), he only of the three that were crucified together, could or did bear the wrath; and the agony of that wrath, if his alone of the three then and there crucified, was distinct from, though present to him at the same time as the agonies (infinitely lesser) of the cross of wood!’​

https://pjmiller.wordpress.com/2009/07/15/darby-brethrenism-by-c-h-spurgeon/

Actually DHK the only thing that would embarrass me would be to think I had been suckered by the false doctrine of Darbyism. I live in a sea of Rapture Ready Christians but I was raised among Saints who believed Scripture. I thank GOD that instead of buying a Scofield after I was saved and being brainwashed by its erroneous doctrine a dear friend of mine advised me to get a Thompson Chain Reference Bible. GOD is indeed good!

It is very sad that so many people on this Forum will accept the "new revelation" claimed by John Darby {A heresy in itself as Baptists are want to accuse Roman Catholicism.} over the teachings of a multitude of Baptists who endured persecution to preach the truth!

 

[OldRegular]

There's some excellent points made in this piece:

The Ninety-Five Theses Against Dispensationalism

You Old Hillbilly! Have you noticed how many Rapture Ready folks on this Forum have jumped to the defense of that erroneous doctrine. One would think they would attempt to refute the 95 thesis one at a time. But perhaps, just perhaps, they are smart enough not to engage in futility!

 

[DHK]

I never get embarrassed about what I post. You may not like what "Tommie Spurgeon" wrote but I also presented information from Charles Spurgeon showing that Darby's beliefs about the atonement of Jesus Christ was heretical in that he believed that the suffering of Jesus Christ was; Well I will just present it one more time:

Tommie Spurgeon was misinformed and misrepresented both dispensationalism and premillennialism. To use him as one of your authorities is in very poor taste indeed. I already have a Catholic in another forum posting RCC propaganda. You also now are posting false propaganda. Do you think it does you any good?

Actually DHK the only thing that would embarrass me would be to think I had been suckered by the false doctrine of Darbyism.

First you have to prove it false, and not just a difference of opinion.

I live in a sea of Rapture Ready Christians but I was raised among Saints who believed Scripture. I thank GOD that instead of buying a Scofield after I was saved and being brainwashed by its erroneous doctrine a dear friend of mine advised me to get a Thompson Chain Reference Bible. GOD is indeed good!

I think calling the doctrine erroneous (your opinion) is much better than calling it a false doctrine. It is more of a difference of opinion. Remember half of the board or more disagree with you.

It is very sad that so many people on this Forum will accept the "new revelation" claimed by John Darby {A heresy in itself as Baptists are want to accuse Roman Catholicism.} over the teachings of a multitude of Baptists who endured persecution to preach the truth!

Here is another slanderous or more accurately libelous accusation. You call it "new revelation," but can't prove it. At best you are probably repeating what any court would call "hearsay" which is a sin in itself.
This sin of hearsay and libel is what you are calling "heresy." You should be ashamed!

 

[OldRegular]

Tommie Spurgeon was misinformed and misrepresented both dispensationalism and premillennialism. To use him as one of your authorities is in very poor taste indeed. I already have a Catholic in another forum posting RCC propaganda. You also now are posting false propaganda. Do you think it does you any good?

First you have to prove it false, and not just a difference of opinion.

I think calling the doctrine erroneous (your opinion) is much better than calling it a false doctrine. It is more of a difference of opinion. Remember half of the board or more disagree with you.

Here is another slanderous or more accurately libelous accusation. You call it "new revelation," but can't prove it. At best you are probably repeating what any court would call "hearsay" which is a sin in itself.
This sin of hearsay and libel is what you are calling "heresy." You should be ashamed!

I have posted on several occasions remarks by dispensational scholar Dr. Thomas Ice's regarding how Darby developed his doctrine of the pre-trib-removal of the Church and his claim of new understanding by GOD. He quotes Darby directly and I have no reason to doubt him since he is a prolific author of "dispensational truths".:laugh: It is certain the the pre-trig-removal of the Church is contrary to historical teaching and Biblical truth. Why should anyone accept Darbyism rather than the teachings embodied in the Baptist Confessions!

DHK, You and I have gone around and around about dispensationalism, sometimes in a rancorous manner. I respect and enjoyed many things you revealed about Roman Catholicism but I have no intention of going through that rancor one more time!

 

[revmwc]

You Old Hillbilly! Have you noticed how many Rapture Ready folks on this Forum have jumped to the defense of that erroneous doctrine. One would think they would attempt to refute the 95 thesis one at a time. But perhaps, just perhaps, they are smart enough not to engage in futility!

Go after Darby, no big deal. Jesus as we have have shown taught a pre-trib doctrine. Paul did too. Besides you seem to think attacking his atonement stance which doesn't even deal with how dispensational teaching. Just like those who can't see that God in His foreknowledge knew who would and who not receive Christ before man was ever created but He did. Many of the reformation teachers had doctrines they were off on, doesn't mean they were wrong on it all.

That's why I depend on reading scripture until it has jump out at me and the true interpretation is shown to me by the Holy Spirit instead of what others say. I'll look to them to see if it agrees with what the Holy Spirit reveals most of the time it does but other times it doesn't.

What do you consult those who agree with what you believe or do you read and let the Holy Spirit show you the truth, I'll keep praying that the Holy Spirit will show you the truth and helps you get through your anger with Darby.

 

[OldRegular]

Go after Darby, no big deal. Jesus as we have have shown taught a pre-trib doctrine.

Post the Scripture. I don't take your word!

Paul did too.

Post the Scripture. I don't take your word!

Besides you seem to think attacking his atonement stance

His atonement stance shows he is a heretic

which doesn't even deal with how dispensational teaching.

So your mentor is a heretic?

That's why I depend on reading scripture until it has jump out at me and the true interpretation is shown to me by the Holy Spirit instead of what others say.

The Holy Spirit does not lead people into false doctrine. Who does that leave?

I'll look to them to see if it agrees with what the Holy Spirit reveals most of the time it does but other times it doesn't.

So the Holy Spirit led those who dissented from Roman Catholicism to erroneously interpret Scripture for 1800 years. The Holy Spirit led those English Baptists who endured tribulation to teach false doctrine. You are beyond ridiculous. You say the Holy Spirit misled Christians for 1800 years and then revealed the truth to Darby who was accused of heresy by Spurgeon. And then the Holy Spirit reveals the truth to you but denies it to the majority of Christians who reject the false doctrine of pre-trib-dispensationalism! :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

What do you consult those who agree with what you believe or do you read and let the Holy Spirit show you the truth, I'll keep praying that the Holy Spirit will show you the truth and helps you get through your anger with Darby.

Darby is not the problem it is Biblically illiterate people who buy his false doctrine! I should also include those who are ignorant of the history of the Church and the struggle of dissenters from Rome to be obedient to the teachings of Scripture. So pray for yourself and others who have been deceived by Darby/Scofield and their disciples!

 

[DHK]

I have posted on several occasions remarks by dispensational scholar Dr. Thomas Ice's regarding how Darby developed his doctrine of the pre-trib-removal of the Church and his claim of new understanding by GOD. He quotes Darby directly and I have no reason to doubt him since he is a prolific author of "dispensational truths".:laugh: It is certain the the pre-trig-removal of the Church is contrary to historical teaching and Biblical truth. Why should anyone accept Darbyism rather than the teachings embodied in the Baptist Confessions!

DHK, You and I have gone around and around about dispensationalism, sometimes in a rancorous manner. I respect and enjoyed many things you revealed about Roman Catholicism but I have no intention of going through that rancor one more time!

I don't care if you disagree with him.
Can't you respectfully disagree? What is wrong with that?
He is not a heretic, unless you can prove him to be one. So far you haven't.
That puts you in the wrong. You just disagree in theology. Or were you once a heretic as well??
Your libelous statement as to Darby receiving "new revelation," who made that up, and where did it come from? Or was it something he said that was taken out of context?
"God has revealed many things to me, one of which is that there are many strange people in this world." Did I claim "new revelation" in that statement? No.

Nevertheless completely without Darby, as history proves, the pre-mill position can be traced right back to the Apostles through the Waldenses and others. It has always been the orthodox position. Those outside of it and dismissing it are in the wrong. Thus dispensationalism has been here since the apostles. You just don't want to admit it.

 

[OldRegular]

I don't care if you disagree with him.
Can't you respectfully disagree? What is wrong with that?
He is not a heretic, unless you can prove him to be one.

I did not call him a heretic, Spurgeon did, But if Spurgeon is correct about Darby's view of the atonement then Darby is a heretic!

Nevertheless completely without Darby, as history proves, the pre-mill position can be traced right back to the Apostles through the Waldenses and others. It has always been the orthodox position. Those outside of it and dismissing it are in the wrong. Thus dispensationalism has been here since the apostles. You just don't want to admit it.

The premillennial {covenant or historical} doctrine can be traced back to the early Church but it definitely was not dispensational. They had the Biblical doctrine of the Church!

The doctrine that the Church is a "parenthesis" in God's program begins with Darby's doctrine of the pre-trib-removal of the Church.

 

[revmwc]

Post the Scripture. I don't take your word!

Post the Scripture. I don't take your word!


His atonement stance shows he is a heretic

So your mentor is a heretic?




The Holy Spirit does not lead people into false doctrine. Who does that leave?

So the Holy Spirit led those who dissented from Roman Catholicism to erroneously interpret Scripture for 1800 years. The Holy Spirit led those English Baptists who endured tribulation to teach false doctrine. You are beyond ridiculous. You say the Holy Spirit misled Christians for 1800 years and then revealed the truth to Darby who was accused of heresy by Spurgeon. And then the Holy Spirit reveals the truth to you but denies it to the majority of Christians who reject the false doctrine of pre-trib-dispensationalism! :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Darby is not the problem it is Biblically illiterate people who buy his false doctrine! I should also include those who are ignorant of the history of the Church and the struggle of dissenters from Rome to be obedient to the teachings of Scripture. So pray for yourself and others who have been deceived by Darby/Scofield and their disciples!

I have posted scripture in other threads you scoff no use in doing it again good day.

 

[OldRegular]

I have posted scripture in other threads you scoff no use in doing it again good day.

You post Scripture that prove nothing. Scripture does defend a false doctrine and pre-trib-dispensationalism that teaches the Church is a "parenthesis" in GOD's program for Israel is a gross heresy!

There is no Scripture showing that Jesus Christ died for national Israel and that is a fact. Jesus Christ died for His Church which includes all the redeemed of all time! So pray for yourself and those others who have been seduced by the Darby/Scofield error!

 

[DHK]

I did not call him a heretic, Spurgeon did, But if Spurgeon is correct about Darby's view of the atonement then Darby is a heretic!

Spurgeon said he had a disagreement with him on the atonement but he didn't say what it was. So unless we have more information about that doctrine the jury is still out. You can't call a person a heretic when you don't know what he believes. That is ridiculous. Again, you go by hearsay which is the greater sin.

A thesaurus gives "gossip" as a synonym for "hearsay."
The Bible says:
(KJV) He that goeth about as a talebearer revealeth secrets: therefore meddle not with him that flattereth with his lips.
Which is put this way in the ISV
(ISV) Whoever spreads gossip betrays confidences; so don't get involved with someone who talks too much.
or in the MKJV
(MKJV) A gossip is a revealer of secrets; so do not mix with him who flatters with his lips.
--God hates the sin of gossip; a talebearer; hearsay.

The premillennial {covenant or historical} doctrine can be traced back to the early Church but it definitely was not dispensational. They had the Biblical doctrine of the Church!

If it is premillennial it is dispensational. That is obvious. The Millennial Kingdom is a dispensation. What follows is a dispensation. What is "pre" is a dispensation. Obviously, there are dispensations. This fact you cannot deny.

The doctrine that the Church is a "parenthesis" in God's program begins with Darby's doctrine of the pre-trib-removal of the Church.

I never said anything about a "parenthesis" in God's program.
I don't ever remember RevM agreeing to a belief in such a doctrine.
Yet you continue to harp on such a thing.
You are like little Tommie Spurgeon who has so many wrong conceptions about both dispensationalism and premillennialism just because you have a chip on your shoulder for one reason or another.

 

[revmwc]

Post the Scripture. I don't take your word!

Post the Scripture. I don't take your word!


His atonement stance shows he is a heretic

So your mentor is a heretic?




The Holy Spirit does not lead people into false doctrine. Who does that leave?

So the Holy Spirit led those who dissented from Roman Catholicism to erroneously interpret Scripture for 1800 years. The Holy Spirit led those English Baptists who endured tribulation to teach false doctrine. You are beyond ridiculous. You say the Holy Spirit misled Christians for 1800 years and then revealed the truth to Darby who was accused of heresy by Spurgeon. And then the Holy Spirit reveals the truth to you but denies it to the majority of Christians who reject the false doctrine of pre-trib-dispensationalism! :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Darby is not the problem it is Biblically illiterate people who buy his false doctrine! I should also include those who are ignorant of the history of the Church and the struggle of dissenters from Rome to be obedient to the teachings of Scripture. So pray for yourself and others who have been deceived by Darby/Scofield and their disciples!

Scripture has been posted but one more time:

Jesus said their would be a literal tribulation,
Matthew 24:20-22,
20 "But pray ye that your flight be not in the winter, neither on the sabbath day:
21 For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.
22 And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened."

Then He made a promise to all believers that is those who keep the word of His patience that is believe on Him have Faith in His word.

Revelation 3:10 "Because thou hast kept the word of my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth."

Same as verse 22 the "Tribulation that is coming upon ALL the world, earth"

"horas tou parismou" Hour of the Trial, that is time of Trial or Tribulation.
It goes to say "mellousEs erchesthai" one being about to come on the whole earth.

That is a promise to the whole church by Christ and Christ taught this way before Darby. Day=hemera=the last day of the present age, the church age is ending and the church has been called home at this point. She is not seen again until Revelation 19:7-8,
7 "Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.
8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints."

What takes place is God's wrath poured out upon the whole world as has never happened before. Jesus and Paul both taught of a Pre-trib rapture.
A period that was always in God's plan. Always in God time no parenthesis in Gods timetable for man as you keep saying is the church age. Never was a parenthesis never will be, God foreknew the period of the time of the church would come. He foreknew the Tribulation would take place and He foreknew the Kingdom age would come. He wrote the terms of Earth's redemption upon the scroll in Heaven that Jesus takes in His hand and unseals the seven seals and the terms of the earth's that is creations redemption must be met in the Tribulation. For Christ is the Redeemer of all creation and that is what the Kingdom on earth is all about. He in knowing that gave promises to Israel of a coming Kingdom and that is seen as I have shown in Revelation 20.

That is what has been revealed to us all through Scripture by the Holy Spirit.

Paul in Romans 5:8-10, 8 "But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
9 Much more then, being now justified by his blood, we shall be saved from wrath through him.
10 For if, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his life."
What is that wrath, the same greek word for wrath is seen in
Revelation 6:17 "For the great day of his wrath is come; and who shall be able to stand?"
The Tribulation is the day of God's wrath which comes under the terms of earth's redemption contained in the book with 7 seals. These terms must be met and are through the events of the Tribulation.

Not sure if Darby ever taught it that way but that is what Revelation contains and is. The Kingdom comes to a redeemed earth with Christ reigning in Jerusalem during the 1000 year period seen in Revelation 20.