Amillennialism Debate -Part Three

The wisest man that ever lived (apart from Jesus Christ) said: "There is nothing new under the sun." So take your clue from there.
There are many pre-tribbers. There were before and after Darby. That doesn't mean we have to be associated with that one man because of him. Shall we call you Augustinians??
DHK

 

Daniel David's posts should be deleted along with anyone else's insulting remarks. However, you and a few other moderators are taking unlikable truths and calling them insults. I think the onus is on the moderators to show us where we have used Darbite as an insult.

 

Believe me! He has been. Just not on this thread. The moderators cannot be on every thread and post at all times. There is a moderator alert button when you see things get out of hand. Use it. But most of all act maturely and use language that is seasoned with grace. Don't have a "If he can do it; the I can too" mentality" What's up with that?
DHK

 

You are making false accusations. That is what is wrong. I don't follow the teaching of a man. As I told you already, I held to the position without ever hearing of Darby. My position is a Biblical one, for which I don't need to be insulted for, nor ridiculed. If you want this debate to continue then you will have to agree to do it on Biblical grounds, i.e. pre-trib vs. amill. Stop with the name-calliing. There is no need for it. I am not a follower of any man's teaching. I follow the teaching of the Word of God. What you are doing is insulting a rather large group of people on this board, and you have to stop.
That is all there is to it.
DHK

 

To all moderators,

I also challenge you to not twist "informing" and "challenging" into "insulting." Again, show us where we have done that. I, quite frankly think that we Amills have done a remarkable job of withholding insults while being slandered in the way we have.

Scripture says that what we are doing is legitimate..."And the Lord's servants must not be quarrelsome but kindly to everyone, an apt teacher, forbearing, correcting his opponents with gentelness. God may perhaps grant that they will repent and come to know the truth, and they may escape from the snare of the devil, after being captured by him to do his will."

 

You've been so busy perhaps you missed this one.

 

Believe me! He has been. Just not on this thread. The moderators cannot be on every thread and post at all times. There is a moderator alert button when you see things get out of hand. Use it. But most of all act maturely and use language that is seasoned with grace. Don't have a "If he can do it; the I can too" mentality" What's up with that?
DHK </font>[/QUOTE]Can you show me from any of my posts where I nave called anyone other than a Darbyite. If so I will publically apologize,

 

Thanks trailblazer!

 

I think the moderators of this Board owe us an apology for turning "informing" and "challenging" into "insulting."

 

It has been charged many times in this particular debate, (now in three threads) that Darby is the "father" of dispensationalism, and by extention, of premillenialism.
These same men who have made this charge also have appealed to history and the Early chruch Fathers to show that Amil theology is oldest and by extention, most orthodox.
Au contraire!

Go here for a thorough treatment of such nonsense.
http://www.tyndale.edu/dirn/articles/early2.html

You will also note that this author makes mention of the error of Darby.
You will ALSO note that this author thoroughly refutes the Idea that pre-mil is something new!


In HIS service;
Jim

 

Jim;....

No one has said that pre-millenialism was "new."
What is true is that it was always considered to be an aberrant teaching when compared to the primarily Amillenialism teaching that was taught for 1,800 years.

It was then that Darby picked up on those aberrant teachings and added to them to come up with a totally new teaching called "dispensationism." Then Scofield himself added those teachings to his Reference Bible.

 

Did you go to the link and READ it?
Darby discounted the testimony of the Early Church Fathers, and it is THIS error that got him into trouble. The ECF taught pre-mil.
It was called Chiliasm then but is essentially the SAME pre-mil as taught today.
No it was NOT aberrant. On the contrary, it was opposed by the ECF who built the aberrant RCC. This fact alone ought to raise a red flag when considering A-mil theology.
Perhaps you ought to study the ECF environment a bit further. That "primary Amil teaching" taught for 1800 years is that which the RCC still holds today. And it is twisted Scripture.

In HIS service;
Jim

 

I have never claimed that Darby is the father of premillennialism. He was not. Premillennialism along with amillennialism was the doctrine of the early Church. However these premillennialists, whom we call Covenant or Historic Premillennialists, believed that the Church was one with the "believing" remnant, Spiritual Israel.

It was Darby who postulated the false doctrine that God has two peoples "one related to the earth with earthly people and earthly objectives involved, which is Judaism; while the other is related to heaven with heavenly people and heavenly objectives involved, which is Christianity.” It was also Darby who postulated the idea of the removal of the Church prior to the so-called Great Tribulation.

 

Jim,

I read your article. I would agree that Darby is "out there". Regarding some of claims about the fathers being premillenialists - I would agree that Irenaeus and Papias were pretty clearly millenialists, that is they believed that Christ would return and inaugurate a thousand year earthly reign.

The evidence for Clement, Ignatius, and certainly Polycarp is quite questionable. Ignatius and Clement both alluded to a "millenium" but both also spoke of departing immediately to be with God (implying heaven without an intervening millenium). Polycarp cannot be called a millenialist as the majority of his writings suggest otherwise.

As I said I am an amillenialist because I think this is the most cogent scriptural doctrine, taking ALL scripture into context. That does involve hyperbolizing references to a "millenium", which I think is acceptable. That being said I respect historic premillenialism as a valid interpretation even though I think it errs on the side of being overly literal.

My problem is with the "rapture". This was certainly not an early church doctrine and in my opinion is a 100% man-made doctrine which does owe some of its popularity to Darby's early teachings. There is not one single verse of scripture that clearly shows that we will all be snatched up (so that we miss the "tribulation") and THEN enjoy a thousand year reign with Christ and THEN go to Heaven proper. In fact 1 Thes 4:16 says that we'll "ever be with the Lord" after the so-called rapture. What about connecting it to the millenium?

So my problem is with a "rapture" and not necessarily with a millenium.

 

Following is the results of research (not just out-of-thin-air-claims) that I did on the Internet. If any moderator turns this into “insults” they are depriving me of my right to use this Board to inform.

In my post on the roots of dispensationalism and the era of its birth, I stated that it was a phenomenon that occurred within about a 40-70 year period of time when the major false religions of today got started – and I might add, that they seemed to all originate on the east coast of the USA which is very interesting indeed. This is not an attack on dispensational roots but is a “proceed with caution and check your roots” admonition for you to seriously consider. I would hope that a Christian brother would do that for me if I were not confident that Amillenialism was the predominant doctrine of the Christian church for 1,800 years.

I have not included the 16-year old visionary, Margaret MacDonald, which actually was the springboard for J. N. Darby’s idea of a secret rapture nor am I trying to state that dispensationalism is a cult as JW’s are. I am also not saying that dispensationalists are not Christians. I leave that up to God. I am saying, though, that the doctrine is in grave error and does justify a serious investigation if one is dedicated to following the Word of God in one’s belief system.

JOSEPH SMITH
Raised a Christian in Vermont and New York, Joseph Smith was the prophet and founder of the Mormon Church. According to Smith's account, he had a vision from God when he was fourteen years old. A messenger directed him to a hillside in rural New York… Smith, using the [suddenly discovered] stones, translated the word of Mormon to form the new canon of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints (also called the Mormon Church or LDS), founded in 1830.

CHARLES T. RUSSELL
Active in the Christian Congregationalist church in Pennsylvania, Charles T. Russell broke off and formed an independent congregation in 1880 called the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society. Russell wrote and lectured on Biblical prophecy, preaching that the return of the invisible spirit of Jesus Christ happened in 1874. Russell believed that Jesus would rule for 1,000 years, and that all people (living and dead) would eventually be divinely judged.

MARY BAKER EDDY
After a sudden recovery from a serious injury in 1866, Mary Baker Eddy began to formulate the ideas that would lead her to form the Church of Christ, Scientist. Beginning in the 1870s she wrote extensively, publishing Science and Health in 1875. In 1889 she chartered the Church of Christ, Scientist in Boston, Massachusetts.

ELLEN G. WHITE (Name at birth: Ellen Harmon)
Ellen G. White is one of the founders of the Seventh-day Adventist Church, which was officially organized in 1863. Although raised as a Methodist, Ellen Harmon was influenced by the "Adventist" movement of New England in the 1840s. Led by William Miller, a Baptist preacher, Adventists believed that Jesus would return to earth in either 1843 or 1844 (some pinned it down to 22 October 1844). In 1846 Harmon married a minister, James White, and together they devoted themselves to preaching religious principles based on visions she believed to be revelations from God.

JOHN NELSON DARBY
A “particular interpretation of Christ's return ... was developed by an Irish Protestant, John Nelson Darby (1800-1882)." Darby saw a second coming of Christ, which he "believed would precede the time of troubles, or 'tribulation,' mentioned in several New Testament passages, [which] he called the 'secret rapture.'

Darby began to develop his seven-age dispensationalism about [1830]. By 1835 he added 'secret rapture,' and had gradually added dispensations up to 1838.

John Nelson Darby spread his beliefs while visiting the United States and Canada 1859-1877. At first he tried to win members of existing Protestant congregations to his sect, but met with little success.

Geographically, the doctrine moved from its original foothold in the large cities of New York, Boston, Chicago, and St. Louis to the northeast and Midwest. Later it spread to the West and South.

C. I. SCOFIELD
Darby, as well as his teachings, probably would be unheard of today were it not for his devoted follower, Scofield[/b].. Scofield came to know him and became enamored by his teachings. Scofield wrote many books, founded what is now called the Philadelphia College of the Bible, and, in 1909, published his Scofield Reference Bible. All these efforts inculcated the Plymouth Brethren teachings learned from Darby.

MOODY BIBLE INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO
In 1890, C. I. Scofield began a Comprehensive Bible Correspondence Course, later taken over about 1914 by the Moody Bible Institute (Dwight. L. Moody, founder of the Moody Church, had converted Scofield, and Scofield preached and presided at Moody's funeral in 1899). While in the US, Darby was invited to speak at D. L. Moody's church in Chicago.

DALLAS THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY
Walvoord was the Professor of Systematic Theology at Dallas Theological Seminary for over fifty years. He also served as the President of the seminary from 1953 to1986.

The two men who most influenced Walvoord, as he developed as a thinker, were Lewis Sperry Chafer, the first President of Dallas Theological Seminary, and C.I. Scofield of the Scofield Reference Bible. Walvoord actually served on the committee to produce the New Scofield Reference Bible (1967).

So, be the roots and the era of new teachings, and various promoters of Darby’s dispensationalism. These are not trumped up theories, they are facts that can be found anywhere in books and on the internet.

 

[post snipped]

[ March 02, 2005, 12:34 PM: Message edited by: Dr. Bob ]

 

When anyone, moderator or otherwise, makes false claims about what a poster is saying they most definately owe that person(s) an apology. Pastors are not above apologizing.