John Nelson Darby vs Baptist Confessions of Faith

[OldRegular]

Someone once said: "You are what you read."

That is the reason that I thank GOD I never got a Scofield Bible. That book has done more to spread the false doctrine of Darby among Southern Baptists than any other book. The Bible certainly never led them to pre-trib-dispensationalism with its "parenthesis" Church.

 

[DHK]

OR quotes from ICE:

JOHN NELSON DARBY AND THE RAPTURE, by Thomas Ice

Supporters of pretribulationism generally believe that John Nelson Darby (1800– 1882) revived this lost New Testament teaching through intense Bible study during convalescence from a riding accident in December 1827 and January 1828. Evangelical opponents of pretribulationism often put forth theories that cast Darby in a bad light. For example, some say Darby got it from Edward Irving (1792–1834), while others say it originated from the prophetic utterance of a fifteen-year old Scottish lassie Margaret Macdonald (1815–1840). Both sources are understood to be tainted since Irving was considered exocentric and heretical and Macdonald’s prophetic utterance is thought to be demonic. What is the evidence that Darby developed his view from his own personal study?}

//snip//

PART #1

A PROVIDENTIAL ACCIDENT

At this time, Darby was experiencing a disappointment from a failed spiritual and physical austerity phase in his life, the reality of an Erastian church that he believed was in ruins and differed little from the unbelieving world, and his search for an assurance of salvation in his conscience. “Darby’s Christian understanding and experience were about to change radically,” notes Brethren historian Tim Grass. As one who began his ministry as a high churchman, Darby was on the verge of becoming an evangelical dissenter when he experienced a riding accident. Darby describes it as follows:

//snip//

An accident happened which laid me aside for a time; my horse was frightened and had thrown me against a door-post.

This period of Darby’s life is known among Darby scholars as “The Convalescence” during which he experienced “The Deliverance.” After the accident, Darby was taken to the home of Susannah Pennefather (1785–1862), his older sister, in Dublin in order to recover.

Almost all of us consider this a lot of bunk.
It goes in the same category as Icon who claimed: "No one could understand (or receive) Calvinism except by 'Divine Enlightenment.'"
Accordingly, every Calvinist here has received divine inspiration from God, has been spoken to by God, has in some way been enlightened by God that he was able to be a Calvinist. And, furthermore, not I, Darrell, or or any other non-Calvinist (according to Icon) am able to become a Calvinist without a special Divine Enlightenment from God Almighty.

Now that is not as radical as what Ice wrote about Darby, not even close.
Who is the more radical? It wasn't Darby!
But I am not defending him, because I don't follow the teachings of either Icon or Darby. I am just saying that their is a poster here who has a fixation with someone in history that has become his object so much so that to some it might be considered an idol.

 

[Rippon]

Someone once said: "You are what you read."

Ernie Reisinger was a man of the Word. It is beyond dispute.

He appreciated the works of the Puritans who were saturated with the Word of God.

Anyone who takes the time to read the works of Dr. D-M-L-J will gain a profound understanding and reverence for the Scripture.

 

[DHK]

Ernie Reisinger was a man of the Word. It is beyond dispute.

He appreciated the works of the Puritans who were saturated with the Word of God.

Anyone who takes the time to read the works of Dr. D-M-L-J will gain a profound understanding and reverence for the Scripture.

I don't doubt that. I am just saying how he was influenced; what made him change? It wasn't simply by studying the Bible, but rather by reading the Puritans. He judged dispensationalism by the Puritans not by the Word of God.

 

[OldRegular]

I don't doubt that. I am just saying how he was influenced; what made him change? It wasn't simply by studying the Bible, but rather by reading the Puritans. He judged dispensationalism by the Puritans not by the Word of God.

And you got pre-trib-dispensationalism only from reading the Bible. Well Darby got it just from reading Isaiah 32!:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

 

[OldRegular]

OR quotes from ICE:

Almost all of us consider this a lot of bunk.
It goes in the same category as Icon who claimed: "No one could understand (or receive) Calvinism except by 'Divine Enlightenment.'"
Accordingly, every Calvinist here has received divine inspiration from God, has been spoken to by God, has in some way been enlightened by God that he was able to be a Calvinist. And, furthermore, not I, Darrell, or or any other non-Calvinist (according to Icon) am able to become a Calvinist without a special Divine Enlightenment from God Almighty.

Now that is not as radical as what Ice wrote about Darby, not even close.
Who is the more radical? It wasn't Darby!
But I am not defending him, because I don't follow the teachings of either Icon or Darby. I am just saying that their is a poster here who has a fixation with someone in history that has become his object so much so that to some it might be considered an idol.

No! I simply understand the source of the pre-trib error and feel compelled to tell my brothers and sisters in Christ of that error. But some simply will not face the truth of History. Darby is the "daddy" of pre-trib-dispensationalism whether you or anyone else on this board will admit it.!

 

[OldRegular]

Ernie Reisinger was a man of the Word. It is beyond dispute.

He appreciated the works of the Puritans who were saturated with the Word of God.

Anyone who takes the time to read the works of Dr. D-M-L-J will gain a profound understanding and reverence for the Scripture.

I agree! Martyn Lloyd-Jones had a wonderful understanding of Scripture. More than that he wrote in a manner that could be understood. A true understanding of Scripture does not teach either a pre-trib-"snatching away" of the Church or that the Church is a "parenthesis" in GOD's program for national Israel/

 

[revmwc]

That is the reason that I thank GOD I never got a Scofield Bible. That book has done more to spread the false doctrine of Darby among Southern Baptists than any other book. The Bible certainly never led them to pre-trib-dispensationalism with its "parenthesis" Church.

Why are you so insistent upon there being a parenthesis Chruch. Not one person in this Thread has insisted on placing a parenthesis in God's plan except you, is that an Amilennial teaching or something?

 

[DHK]

No! I simply understand the source of the pre-trib error and feel compelled to tell my brothers and sisters in Christ of that error. But some simply will not face the truth of History. Darby is the "daddy" of pre-trib-dispensationalism whether you or anyone else on this board will admit it.!

It may be that at least or more than half the posters on this board are dispensational in their theology. But you "understand" that we are all in error.
You "understand" that we are not facing the truths of history.
You are convinced that Darby is the "daddy" of pre-trib-dispensationalism, even if others can show you otherwise.

You are willing to make this such a matter of contention that with you it is no longer a matter of difference in theology or opinion, it is heresy.
As you have already put it in a more diplomatic way: "will not face the 'truth'..
Or,
"source of pre-trib error...

We believe what is not true, what is error, what is contrary to the Bible or IOW, heresy. That is what you believe about those who believe in dispensationalism.

Really, is it that important of a doctrine to die on?
The Lord may come and we all might be raptured before you have a chance to answer this. Just think of that!

Paul expected the Lord to return in his time; as did Peter, John and the other writers of the NT.

 

[OldRegular]

Why are you so insistent upon there being a parenthesis Chruch. Not one person in this Thread has insisted on placing a parenthesis in God's plan except you, is that an Amilennial teaching or something?

I have quoted the pre-trib-fathers regarding the "parenthesis" church!

 

[OldRegular]

It may be that at least or more than half the posters on this board are dispensational in their theology. But you "understand" that we are all in error.
You "understand" that we are not facing the truths of history.
You are convinced that Darby is the "daddy" of pre-trib-dispensationalism, even if others can show you otherwise.

No one has shown that Darby is not the father of pre-trib-dispensationalism. You deny it but denial does not history make!

 

[revmwc]

No one has shown that Darby is not the father of pre-trib-dispensationalism. You deny it but denial does not history make!

It has been shown in several post where it was shown in 100 - 300 A.D. the imminent return of Christ for His church was being watched for before the tribulation. It has been shown by the verse in this thread that Paul authored the pre-trib view you just can't dispute it without twisting it to show your view. You can not prove Paul did not mean the Warath of the Tribulation as Revelation 6:17 says began. Paul stated it to the Romans and Thessalonicans. Jesus also said He would return for His church. John 14:3 "And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also" where is Christ, in Heaven and what did Paul say in

1 Thessalonians 4:16 "For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:
17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord."
Again Paul said "we" that is believers of the church age would be harpazo with those who are resurrected. Notice he says nothing about the dead not in Christ being raised. Then we will ever be with the Lord, nothing about the Great White Throne judgment taking place. Paul was answering a question from the believers in Thessalonica about the return of Christ for His church and this is His answer. So Paul here is teaching the Rapture and that is very clear in this passage of scripture.

 

[DHK]

No one has shown that Darby is not the father of pre-trib-dispensationalism. You deny it but denial does not history make!

Just one example:
Isaac Watts system of dispensationalism was closer to Scofield's than Darby's was. That in itself should shoot your theory in the foot.

 

[Marooncat79]

Here is your Watts reply

http://scottaniol.com/wp-content/uploads/Aniol2.pdf

 

[DHK]

Here is your Watts reply

http://scottaniol.com/wp-content/uploads/Aniol2.pdf

No one has shown that Darby is not the father of pre-trib-dispensationalism.

Let's take OR's statement at face value.
It is called a logical fallacy. It is a universal negative.

He starts off by saying "No one has shown..."

Can he prove that?
Absolutely not!
In order to prove that "no one" has shown..., he would have to survey all believers everywhere, not only during this time, but before this time, and before Darby's time. Every person (believer) that ever lived would have to be interviewed.
No one means "no one." That means absolutely everyone on the earth before Darby could never have believed in a pre-trib rapture. It was completely unknown to every believer that ever lived.

Can OR prove that? Does he have that kind of omniscience? Does he have that ability to survey all people from all ages from Christ onward to make absolutely sure that no one believed in a pre-trib rapture,

because his statement says no one has shown...

It is a universal negative which is impossible to prove. Unless he is God; unless he is omniscient, he cannot prove the statement he has made.

 

[OldRegular]

Just one example:
Isaac Watts system of dispensationalism was closer to Scofield's than Darby's was. That in itself should shoot your theory in the foot.

Show where Watts taught the pre-trib-'Snatching away" of the Church. Show where Watts taught that the Church was a "parenthesis" In God's program for national Israel!

 

[OldRegular]

http://scottaniol.com/wp-content/uploads/Aniol2.pdf

WAS ISAAC WATTS A PROTO-DISPENSATIONALIST?
by Scott Aniol
{Scott Aniol is currently pursuing a Ph.D. in Church Music at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth, TX.}

ORIGINS OF DISPENSATIONAL DISTINCTIVES
John Nelson Darby
Dispensationalists today usually admit that dispensationalism as a system first appeared in Darby’s writings. For example, Charles Ryrie states that “there is no question that the Plymouth Brethren, of which John Nelson Darby (1800–1882) was a leader, had much to do with the systematizing and promoting of dispensationalism.” However, they are, nevertheless, often quick to distance themselves from him, as Ryrie does in the very next breath: “But neither Darby nor the Breth- ren originated the concepts involved in the system, and even if they had that would not make them wrong if they can be shown to be bib- lical.” He repeats this in another place: “Darby’s teaching...was obvi- ously not the pattern which Scofield followed.... The glib statement that dispensationalism originated with Darby, whose system was taken over and popularized by Scofield, is not historically accurate.”

Others are even more adamant that Darby’s influence is exaggerated:

This writer does not believe that the prominence of Darby should be confused with the dominance of Darby, and he believes the facts cited in the foregoing paragraphs are adequate proof that dispensationalism was not invented approximately 125 years ago by Darby. Dispensationalism had its roots in the very theses of early church chiliasm; the concept of multiple ages was often expressed by the fathers. After the reformation controversy over soteriology was settled, men again began thinking and writing about the purpose of God in the world, and some of them sug- gested six-and seven-division systems long before Darby. That there has been refinement of these views and the growth of an extensive literature in comparatively recent times is conceded. But it is not conceded that dispensationalism is a modern invention and perversion.​

Dispensationalists attempt to distance themselves from Darby for per- haps two reasons. First, it allows them to escape charge of recency. Second, it prevents association with the perceived divisiveness of Darby and the separatist Plymouth Brethren movement of which he was a part.

It is apparent from the following that Isaac Watts bore no resemblance to the pre-trib-"snatching away" of the parenthesis Church as some on this BB like to claim. In fact he was just the opposite, a covenant premillennialist who understood the following:

Watts manifests this replacement emphasis in several places. He argues that God has rejected Israel as his people because of their sin and has replaced them with the Christian church:

God has fulfilled his word, and cut them off according to his threatenings, from his relation to him as their God, nor are they any longer his people; they have left their names for a curse to his chosen people, that is, the gospel church made up chiefly of Gentiles, who esteem the name of a Jew a reproach or a curse, and God has called his people, by another name, that is, christians, as he threatened so plainly by Isaiah, his prophet, chapter lxv. 15.

........................................................................................:laugh:-:laugh:-:laugh:-:laugh:-

WATTS’S VIEW OF ISRAEL AND THE CHURCH

The answer to the previous question will become clearer in consid- ering how Watts views the relationship between Israel and the church. In several cases Watts calls Israel “the church,” proclaims the “church or nation of the Jews” to be a “type or figure of the whole invisible church of God,” and explains that for Israel “the church was their whole nation, for it was ordained of God to be a national church.” This does not necessarily indicate a blurring of the two, however, for dispensationalists are not immune from calling Israel a “church”— both Darby and Scofield do so. For example, Darby mentions the “Jewish church (i.e., assembly) or nation” in his writings, and like- wise, Scofield says, “It [‘church’] is thus appropriately used, not only of the New Testament church and of the New Testament churches, but also of Israel in the wilderness (Acts vii : 38), and of the town meeting of Ephesus (Acts xix : 32, 39, 41, ‘assembly’).” As both of them high- light the underlying meaning of “assembly,” however, they seem to be using the term in its general sense rather than specifically referring to the New Testament body. Watts, however, appears to use the term more specifically and sees at least a typological relationship between the two bodies and very likely a replacement of Israel by the church.

Watts manifests this replacement emphasis in several places. He argues that God has rejected Israel as his people because of their sin and has replaced them with the Christian church:

God has fulfilled his word, and cut them off according to his threatenings, from his relation to him as their God, nor are they any longer his people; they have left their names for a curse to his chosen people, that is, the gospel church made up chiefly of Gentiles, who esteem the name of a Jew a reproach or a curse, and God has called his people, by another name, that is, christians, as he threatened so plainly by Isaiah, his prophet, chapter lxv. 15. These were the children of the kingdom concerning whom our Savior foretels, that they should not sit down with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven, but should be cast out into outer darkness; Mat. viii. 11, 12.52​

The church, according to Watts, inherits all of the promises God made to Israel, albeit in spiritual form:

As those Gentiles who do, really and inwardly, receive the Messiah, and practise his religion in faith and holiness, come into all these inward, real, and spiritual privileges and blessings; so all that make a visible and credi- ble profession of faith, and holiness, and universal subjection to Christ, come into all the outward privileges of the visible church, under the gos- pel: Some few of which privileges are continued from the Jewish church, but the greatest part of them are abolished, because the gospel state is more spiritual than the dispensation of the levitical law, and not such a typical state as that was; and none are to be admitted into this visible church, and esteemed complete members of it, but those who make such a declaration and profession of their faith in Christ, and their avowed subjection to him, as may be supposed, in a judgment of charity, to manifest them to be real believers in Christ, the true subjects of his spiri- tual kingdom, and members of the invisible church.​

It should be obvious to anyone who reads the above that Watts bore absolutely no resemblance to the "Rapture Ready" folks on this BB! Watts states unequivocally that GOD has rejected National Israel just as I have stated on this BB numerous times presenting the following as Scriptural proof:

Matthew 21:43. Therefore say I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.

 

[revmwc]

No one has shown that Darby is not the father of pre-trib-dispensationalism. You deny it but denial does not history make!

Maybe this will help you see it, here are some that show early church leaders, those in the early stages of the church who were looking for the immenent return of Christ for his church.

Lets look at them:

Irenaeus (130 A.D. – 202 AD) "was a bishop of the church in Lyons, France. He was an eyewitness to the Apostle John (who wrote the Book of Revelation) and a disciple of Polycarp, the first of the Apostle John’s disciples. Irenaeus is most-known for his five-volume treatise, Against Heresies in which he exposed the false religions and cults of his day along with advice for how to share the Gospel with those were a part of them.

In his writings on Bible prophecy, he acknowledged the phrase “a time, times and dividing of times” in Daniel 7 to signify the 3 ½ year reign of the Antichrist as ruler of the world before the Second Coming of Christ. He also believed in a literal Millennial reign of Christ on earth following the Second Coming and the resurrection of the just."

let's check another:

"Cyprian (200 AD – 258 AD) – Cyprian was Bishop of the church in Carthage. During his short stint as leader of the church, he guided the flock through intense persecution at the hands of the Roman Empire. In 258 AD after spending seven months of confinement to his home by order of Roman authorities, he was beheaded for his faith. Several of his works still exist today.

In Treatises of Cyprian he wrote in describing the end times Great Tribulation:

“We who see that terrible things have begun, and know that still more terrible things are imminent, may regard it as the greatest advantage to depart from it as quickly as possible. Do you not give God thanks, do you not congratulate yourself, that by an early departure you are taken away, and delivered from the shipwrecks and disasters that are imminent? Let us greet the day which assigns each of us to his own home, which snatches us hence, and sets us free from the snares of the world and restores us to paradise and the kingdom.”

And another:

"Ephraim (306 AD – 373 AD) was made a deacon in the church in Syria in 338 and later became the bishop of Nisibis. Although he was made a “saint” in the Roman Catholic Church, he was not involved in Catholicism and did not even live in the Roman Empire until the final years of his life. The book Pseudo Ephraim was one of his still existing works. It was called “Pseudo” because of later dispute over authorship. However the book’s one reference to the rapture is very compelling:

In his work, On The Last Times 2, he wrote:

“We ought to understand thoroughly therefore, my brothers, what is imminent or overhanging. Already there have been hunger and plagues, violent movements of nations and signs, which have been predicted by the Lord, they have already been fulfilled (consummated), and there is not other which remains, except the advent of the wicked one in the completion of the Roman kingdom. Why therefore are we occupied with worldly business, and why is our mind held fixed on the lusts of the world or on the anxieties of the ages? Why therefore do we not reject every care of worldly business, and why is our mind held fixed on the lusts of the world or on the anxieties of the ages? Why therefore do we not reject every care of earthly actions and prepare ourselves for the meeting of the Lord Christ, so that he may draw us from the confusion, which overwhelms all the world? Believe you me, dearest brother, because the coming (advent) of the Lord is nigh, believe you me, because the end of the world is at hand, believe me, because it is the very last time.

Or do you not believe unless you see with your eyes? See to it that this sentence be not fulfilled among you of the prophet who declares: “Woe to those who desire to see the day of the Lord!” For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins. And so, brothers most dear to me, it is the eleventh hour, and the end of the world comes to the harvest, and angels, armed and prepared, hold sickles in their hands, awaiting the empire of the Lord. And we think that the earth exists with blind infidelity, arriving at its downfall early. Commotions are brought forth, wars of diverse peoples and battles and incursions of the barbarians threaten, and our regions shall be desolated, and we neither become very much afraid of the report nor of the appearance, in order that we may at least do penance; because they hurl fear at us, and we do not wish to be changed, although we at least stand in need of penance for our actions!”

So here we see at least three early Christian leaders who were looking forward to Christ return before the Tribulation. From around A.D. 150 to A.D. 350 they felt the Lord's imminent return would come. It didn't and thus Peter said scoffers would say where is His coming and it continues today scoffers asking where is His coming to snatch the church away.

Seems you had some misinformation that Darby started it seems these three taught it and one was under the Apostle John and knew first hand what the Apocalyptic Literary writing by John meant and he took it literally.

 

[OldRegular]

Maybe this will help you see it, here are some that show early church leaders, those in the early stages of the church who were looking for the immenent return of Christ for his church.

Lets look at them:

Irenaeus (130 A.D. – 202 AD) "was a bishop of the church in Lyons, France. He was an eyewitness to the Apostle John (who wrote the Book of Revelation) and a disciple of Polycarp, the first of the Apostle John’s disciples. Irenaeus is most-known for his five-volume treatise, Against Heresies in which he exposed the false religions and cults of his day along with advice for how to share the Gospel with those were a part of them.

In his writings on Bible prophecy, he acknowledged the phrase “a time, times and dividing of times” in Daniel 7 to signify the 3 ½ year reign of the Antichrist as ruler of the world before the Second Coming of Christ. He also believed in a literal Millennial reign of Christ on earth following the Second Coming and the resurrection of the just."

let's check another:

"Cyprian (200 AD – 258 AD) – Cyprian was Bishop of the church in Carthage. During his short stint as leader of the church, he guided the flock through intense persecution at the hands of the Roman Empire. In 258 AD after spending seven months of confinement to his home by order of Roman authorities, he was beheaded for his faith. Several of his works still exist today.

In Treatises of Cyprian he wrote in describing the end times Great Tribulation:

“We who see that terrible things have begun, and know that still more terrible things are imminent, may regard it as the greatest advantage to depart from it as quickly as possible. Do you not give God thanks, do you not congratulate yourself, that by an early departure you are taken away, and delivered from the shipwrecks and disasters that are imminent? Let us greet the day which assigns each of us to his own home, which snatches us hence, and sets us free from the snares of the world and restores us to paradise and the kingdom.”

And another:

"Ephraim (306 AD – 373 AD) was made a deacon in the church in Syria in 338 and later became the bishop of Nisibis. Although he was made a “saint” in the Roman Catholic Church, he was not involved in Catholicism and did not even live in the Roman Empire until the final years of his life. The book Pseudo Ephraim was one of his still existing works. It was called “Pseudo” because of later dispute over authorship. However the book’s one reference to the rapture is very compelling:

In his work, On The Last Times 2, he wrote:

“We ought to understand thoroughly therefore, my brothers, what is imminent or overhanging. Already there have been hunger and plagues, violent movements of nations and signs, which have been predicted by the Lord, they have already been fulfilled (consummated), and there is not other which remains, except the advent of the wicked one in the completion of the Roman kingdom. Why therefore are we occupied with worldly business, and why is our mind held fixed on the lusts of the world or on the anxieties of the ages? Why therefore do we not reject every care of worldly business, and why is our mind held fixed on the lusts of the world or on the anxieties of the ages? Why therefore do we not reject every care of earthly actions and prepare ourselves for the meeting of the Lord Christ, so that he may draw us from the confusion, which overwhelms all the world? Believe you me, dearest brother, because the coming (advent) of the Lord is nigh, believe you me, because the end of the world is at hand, believe me, because it is the very last time.

Or do you not believe unless you see with your eyes? See to it that this sentence be not fulfilled among you of the prophet who declares: “Woe to those who desire to see the day of the Lord!” For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins. And so, brothers most dear to me, it is the eleventh hour, and the end of the world comes to the harvest, and angels, armed and prepared, hold sickles in their hands, awaiting the empire of the Lord. And we think that the earth exists with blind infidelity, arriving at its downfall early. Commotions are brought forth, wars of diverse peoples and battles and incursions of the barbarians threaten, and our regions shall be desolated, and we neither become very much afraid of the report nor of the appearance, in order that we may at least do penance; because they hurl fear at us, and we do not wish to be changed, although we at least stand in need of penance for our actions!”

So here we see at least three early Christian leaders who were looking forward to Christ return before the Tribulation. From around A.D. 150 to A.D. 350 they felt the Lord's imminent return would come. It didn't and thus Peter said scoffers would say where is His coming and it continues today scoffers asking where is His coming to snatch the church away.

Seems you had some misinformation that Darby started it seems these three taught it and one was under the Apostle John and knew first hand what the Apocalyptic Literary writing by John meant and he took it literally.

"Ephraim sounds like a Roman Catholic to me talking about penance:

in order that we may at least do penance; because they hurl fear at us, and we do not wish to be changed, although we at least stand in need of penance for our actions!”

 

[Yeshua1]

No one has shown that Darby is not the father of pre-trib-dispensationalism. You deny it but denial does not history make!

Jesus and paul both taught it in the scriptures though, and many of the ECF did hold to a form of it...

That darby and others rediscovered the truth would be similiar to calvin and luther rediscovering the truth of the gospel, saved by grace alone thru faith alone.


The big thing to consider though in all of this is that we can honestly have discussions and disagreements on what the bible teaches us on the second coming and the timing aspects, but who are you to judge if one is a heretic or not depending on which view they hold?

The church has allowed for pre/Mid/post trib/post Mil/A mil are all being valid, why can;t you?