Tweet

Welcome

Saturday, February 28, 2015

PRE-TRIB RAPTURE DIEHARDS! By Dave MacPherson


    Since the 1970's stunning new data has been surfacing about the pretribulation rapture's long-covered-up beginnings in the 1800's. In recent years several persons associated with Dallas Theological Seminary (which had long been pretribized) have reportedly gone to Britain to check on my research sources and then write books opposing my claims. 
     In 1990 an Ohio pastor told me that Dr. _____ _____, the most qualified DTS prof, traveled there and came back and wrote nothing! The pastor added that he and some others had a good laugh. But change was coming. 
     In 1993 Chuck Swindoll, who became DTS president after John Walvoord, stated: "I'm not sure we're going to make dispensationalism [the chief attraction of which is a pretrib rapture] a part of our marquee as we talk about our school." When asked if the word "dispensationalism" would disappear, he answered: "It may and perhaps it should" ("Christianity Today," Oct. 25, 1993)! But a few diehards (with the stubbornness of Iraqi insurgents and New Orleans looters) keep on milking their cash cow while continuing to cover up and twist the following historical facts about their latter-day, cult-like belief:
 
     1825: British preacher Edward Irving revealed that he had been teaching some of dispensationalism's key aspects as early as late 1825. (John Darby-exalter R. A. Huebner has never even claimed to find any original prophetic idea in Darby before late 1826!)
     1827-1830: Darby was still posttrib during these years. His 1827 paper had him waiting for only the posttrib "restitution of all things." After discussing in 1828 the "unity" of the church, he looked for only the Rev. 19 coming in 1829 and 1830.
     1830: During the spring a young woman in Scotland, Margaret Macdonald, declared that she had discovered in the Bible what had never been seen by others: a rapture of "church" members described as a "pre-Antichrist" (or pretrib) event. Her words: "one taken and the other left" before "THE WICKED [Antichrist] be revealed." She was a partial rapturist seeing only part of the "church" raptured and the rest of the "church" left on earth. When she wrote that the "trial of the Church is from Antichrist," she meant the part of the church not included in her pretrib rapture. Leading partial rapturists including Pember and Govett have always applied the word "church" to the ones "left behind." Robert Norton, Irvingite historian and on-scene witness of Margaret's utterances, wrote that Margaret was the "first" to privately teach pretrib.
     A September article in "The Morning Watch" (Irvingite journal) saw the "Philadelphia" church raptured before a "period of great tribulation" and the "Laodicea" church left on earth. Huebner's "Precious Truths" claimed that Philadelphia was seen raptured before only the "seventh vial" and not before "the great tribulation" even though the article writer added twice on following pages that this "period" was indeed "the great tribulation"! In the previous (June) issue the same writer had seen Philadelphia on earth until the final posttrib advent. In between these two issues, TMW writers had visited Margaret who explained her new "revelation" which was soon reflected on TMW pages without giving her credit!
     In December a published article by Darby was still defending the posttrib view!
     1833: British lawyer Robert Baxter, an ex-Irvingite, wrote that the pretrib "delusion first appeared in Scotland" before it began to be taught in London the following year.
     1834: A Darby letter referred to the new pretrib rapture view, stated that "the thoughts are new," and advocated the subtle introduction of it by writing "it would not be well to have it so clear"! Darby also called it the "new wine." Others who knew that pretrib was then a new view included other Plymouth Brethren, Irvingites, Margaret, and later 19th century historians such as Margaret Oliphant who referred to "a new revelation" in 1830 in western Scotland where Margaret Macdonald lived.
     1837: Years after Darby supposedly had derived a distinction (or separation) between the "church" and "Israel," his 1837 article saw the church "going in with Him to the marriage, to wit, with Jerusalem and the Jews"!
     1839: The first year Darby was clearly pretrib. His pretrib basis then (and during the next three decades) was Rev. 12:5's "man child" that is "caught up." But this "new" Darby teaching was actually a plagiarism of Edward Irving who had been using this verse for the same (pretrib) purpose since 1831!
     1843: In a letter written from Switzerland, Darby referred to "the dissemination of truth and blessing...thus spreading on the right hand and on the left, without knowing whence it came or how it sprung up all of a sudden...." Here he gloated that others didn't know "whence" pretrib came or that he had advocated the subtle sneaking of the new pretrib view into existing groups (see "1834" above)!
     1853: Darby's book "The Irrationalism of Infidelity" recalled his visit to Margaret Macdonald and her brothers in mid-1830. He remembered 23 minor details but carefully omitted the most important one: Margaret's teaching of a coming of Christ that would exempt believers from the great tribulation "judgments"----a detail that all others who visited her and then wrote accounts could easily remember! (It's obvious that Todd Strandberg's mother didn't soap his mouth enough because even though he knows better after the airing of "Open Letter to Todd Strandberg" on the internet, his falsehood-packed "Margaret MacDonald Who?" article on his "Rapture Ready" site continues to pollute minds by stating that I "have never been able to prove that Darby had ever heard of MacDonald or her vision"!)
     1855: An article by eminent Brethren scholar S. P. Tregelles tied "Judaisers" to pretrib. But in an 1864 book he tied "Irving's Church" to pretrib. Both Huebner and Walvoord claimed that Tregelles contradicted himself, and Huebner charged Tregelles with "untruth and slander." But even William Kelly, Darby's editor, saw no contradiction and wrote, concerning "Judaising," that "nowhere is this so patent as in Irvingism"!
     1861: Robert Norton, medical doctor and Irvingite, wrote that the "true origin" of pretrib had been "hidden and misrepresented." (This was about the time that Kelly was working towards the goal of elevating Darby and giving the false impression that Darby should be credited with the pretrib view.) Several pages later, in the same book, Norton revealed Margaret as the true originator of pretrib.
     1863: In his "Five Letters" leading Brethren scholar Tregelles wrote that some Brethren had been unscrupulously issuing tracts by the thousands in which they changed the "words and doctrines" of "the Reformers and others" to give the impression that those ancient writers had actually been teaching the novel doctrines that some Darbyist Brethren were then circulating in the 1800's!
     1864: Brethren scholar Tregelles charged fellow Brethren with changing even the words in ancient hymns: "Sometimes from a hymn beingaltered, writers appear to set forth a secret rapture of which they had never heard, or against which they have protested." I should add that in an 1865 letter Darby asked his editor to preserve the newer (pretrib) hymns and "correct the others," that is, the older (posttrib) ones!
     1860's: From the 1860's to the 1880's William Kelly, editor of Darby's works, was busy putting together some volumes known as "The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby." Opposition to Darbyism had been increasing and Kelly was determined to fight it and continue to exalt Darby. His goal was to present a Darby that was prophetically "mature" long before he actually matured. He achieved this dishonesty with misleading words in brackets inside sentences in Darby's early works, and with footnotes that he "borrowed" from Darby's much later works when he was obviously more developed! Darby even gave this deviousness his blessing. In an 1865 letter to Kelly he wrote: "I should think that some of the Notes would require some revising....Even the sermons contain things I should not accept...." Kelly even flaunted his shameful manipulation in a footnote to Darby's 1830 article; the note said that "it was not worth while either suppressing or changing it."
     Interestingly, since the Irvingites were clear (and clearly first) when it came to public pretrib teaching, they didn't need later "fixers" to dishonestly correct their original statements!
     1872: In an article in "The Princeton Review," Thomas Croskery of Ireland listed beliefs of the Plymouth Brethren including these: "That the moral law is of no use at all to believers" and "that believers have nothing to do in the way of keeping themselves from sin for God must look to them if He will...." He said that "Mr. Darby" pursues his opponents"with a virulence that has no parallel in the history of religious controversy."
     1877: A medical doctor, James Carson, wrote that "the Darbyites have managed to cloak their opinions by using language in a Jesuitical sense...." He added: "Unless a person makes himself properly acquainted with the opinions" of Darbyites and argues "with the utmost precision on every point...it is impossible to manage such wily and slippery customers."
     1879: A later work by Thomas Croskery declared that "Brethrenite doctrine...clearly tends to immorality." He then quoted Darby's editor, William Kelly, who stated: "I am no longer, as a Christian man, having to do with the responsibility that attaches to mortal man, but am passed now into a new state, even while I am in the world." Rev. Frederick Whitfield spoke of "the flagrant immoralities among the Plymouth Brethren" while James Grant commented: "Darbyism is the most selfish religious system with which I am acquainted."
     1880: William Reid's work on Brethrenism revealed that "no other sect was, perhaps, ever so fruitful of divisions" and referred to "the novel doctrines propounded by some of its leaders." He quoted Lord Congleton, a leading Brethren member, who asked: "Have you tried these Brethren
----the Darbyites?....They are false in what they say of their brethren, they are false in doctrine, and they are false in their walk."
     And Henry Craik, a colleague of George Muller, was also quoted: "The truth is, Brethrenism as such, is broken to pieces. By pretending to be wiser, holier, more spiritual, more enlightened, than all other Christians; by rash and unprofitable intrusions into things not revealed; by making mysticism and eccentricity the test of spiritual life and depth; by preferring a dreamy and imaginative theology to the solid food of the Word of God...." (Leading Brethren scholar Harold Rowdon's 1967 book "The Origins of the Brethren," p. 253, quoted earlier Brethren member Lord Congleton who was "disgusted with...the falseness" of Darby's narratives. Rowdon also quoted a historian of the Brethren, W. B. Neatby, who wrote that "the time-honoured method of single combat" was as good a method as any "to elicit the truth" from Darby!)
     1880's: In 1880, a year after his Christian conversion, C. I. Scofield was in the St. Louis jail for forgery because he'd stolen his mother-in-law's life savings in a real estate scam. In 1883 his first wife divorced him (for desertion) and he remarried three months later. Although he had no formal theological training, he began putting a non-conferred "D.D." after his name in the 1890's. In 1899, when he preached D. L. Moody's funeral sermon, he still owed thousands of dollars that he had stolen from acquaintances 20 years earlier. (In 1921 he advised his daughter, who then had financial problems, to pray to an ancient Catholic saint; at the same time his Scofield Bible, p. 1346, was predicting a future reign of "apostate Christendom, headed up under the Papacy"!)
     1889: Aware that for 60 years the leading historians----whether Brethren or Irvingite----had been crediting someone in Irving's circle (and not Darby's circle!) with the pretrib rapture, Darby's editor William Kelly embarked on a sinister plan to discredit the Irvingites (and their female inspiration) and belatedly (and falsely) give credit for pretrib to Darby. He achieved this in 1889-1890 in a series of articles in his own British journal while analyzing the Irvingites in a supposedly fair and honest manner. Let's see a few of the many examples of his clever dishonesty:
     When quoting early Irvingites like Baxter and Norton, Kelly would consistently skip over their clear pretrib teaching but quote just before and after it! And he was a change artist. When Irvingites would write about their pretrib "rapture," Kelly loved to water it down into only their belief in the "Second Coming"! If the Irvingites expressed their belief in an imminent pretrib catching up, Kelly revised it into their "constantly to be expected Lord"! When Irving's followers hoped to escape, by rapture, the coming "tribulation," their "tribulation" was changed by Kelly into only "corrupt or apostate evils"! My 300-page book "The Rapture Plot" has 16 pages (!) of glaring specimens of short quotes exhibiting Kelly's shameful revisions of Irvingite doctrine!
     1918: A prophetic book by E. P. Cachemaille discussed the pretrib origin, tied it to the 1830's, then added: "There has since been much scheming to give the doctrine a reputable origin, scheming by those who did not know the original facts, not being contemporaries of Dr. Tregelles."
     1942: Noted prophecy teacher H. A. Ironside, who had a Brethren background, dared to assert, minus evidence, that what early Brethren taught re the rapture was "so contrary" to what the Irvingites had been teaching, adding that no links had existed between the two groups!
     1960: After mentioning that the claim that Darby originated pretrib "is certainly open to question," evangelical scholar Clarence Bass wrote: "More probably, however, its origin can be traced through the Irvingite movement." But he failed to elaborate, evidently aware that he would be opening a can of you-know-what!
     1973: Darby worshiper R. A. Huebner wrote that "The Irvingites (1828-1834) never held the pretribulation rapture or any 'any-moment' views." He was aware that many couldn't know how close he had repeatedly come to clear pretrib teaching by Irvingites and then had covered up everything while using the same devious tactics his inspiration William Kelly had used a century earlier while analyzing the same Irvingites!
     My "Plot" book has a 31-page chapter of many quotes from the earliest Irvingites showing that they repeatedly and clearly taught pretrib as well as imminence. For example, in 1832 the Irvingite journal said that "some" will be "left in the great tribulation...after the translation of the saints." We've already seen clear pretribism in the Sep., 1830 issue of the Irvingite journal. It's bad enough that Huebner (who never attended seminary, college, or even Bible school) has mind-poisoned his tiny circle of Darby-idolizers, but disastrous that pretrib leaders like Walvoord, Ryrie, LaHaye, and Ice were apparently "too busy" to check Huebner's sources and later on too proud to admit they'd been taken in by him!
     The parallels between Huebner and his two inspirations, Darby and Kelly, are astounding. Like them, he easily applies "demon" to opponents and their beliefs. Like them, he exaggerates and even purposely muddies up Darby's earliest pretrib development and Darby's later reminiscences. And like them, he can deftly dance around pretrib "cobras" in Irvingism (and its female inspiration) without getting bitten! In his 1973 book, Huebner had 95 copying errors when quoting others including pretrib leaders! (For more shocks on the internet, type in "Humbug Huebner.")
     1989: Thomas Ice, one of the biggest pretrib diehards, doesn't have favorites when he discusses the pretrib origin; he can use deviousnessas well as sloppiness. When he reproduced Margaret's short "revelation" account he somehow left out 48 words! As if his carelessness wasn't bad enough, his reproduction also included four distinctive errors that Hal Lindsey had made in his own reproduction of it in 1983----what Ice chose to do instead of going to the original 19th century sources! (See my internet piece "Thomas Ice - Hired Gun" if you are shockproof.)
     1990: A year after his "rapture" of 48 words from Margaret's handwritten "revelation" account, Ice was elevated all the way up to Dallas Seminary's journal which published his article on pretrib history. In it he had some copying errors when quoting John Bray, Huebner, and Walvoord. Even worse, when he quoted the same Margaret Macdonald account, he skipped right over what he knew was her main point (a catching up of church members just before the Antichrist is revealed) even though he quoted shortly before and after it! And when quoting present-day Brethren scholar Harold Rowdon, he used an ellipsis to cover up Rowdon's evidence in his 1967 book that Irvingite developmentpreceded  Darby's!  
     1991: After many objective, no-axe-to-grind scholars had publicly endorsed my research (which emphasized Margaret, the Irvingites, and 1830), R. A. Huebner, aware of the same objective scholarship and determined to negate it, came out with a book in which he claimed to find Darby teaching pretrib in 1827----that is, three years before Margaret etc. But halfway through his book (which had more than 250 copying errors!), he admitted that his 1827 "proof" could refer to something completely different! Nevertheless, die hard Thomas Ice, after admitting to me that he was indeed aware of Huebner's change, continues to declare publicly that Huebner's 1991 book "proves" that Darby was pretrib as early as 1827!
     1992: When Tim LaHaye's "No Fear of the Storm" reproduced Margaret's short account, he "left behind" 48 words----the same 48 words that Ice had left out in 1989! In the same book LaHaye made 84 other copying errors when discussing pretrib beginnings! Although he had a whole chapter focusing on my origin research, un-scholar LaHaye didn't list any of my books in footnotes or bibliography which kept readers from being able to find out what I had actually written! And LaHaye based his analysis on inaccurate secondhand  sources and also made many copying errors when quoting them.
     For many years Tim and Beverly LaHaye's "conservative" organizations have raked in millions of dollars while telling folks to vote for only "moral" political candidates, and while appearing to be very pro-family and anti-gay. What they haven't revealed is that their son Lee LaHaye has long been the Chief Financial Officer of Concerned Women for America and that Lee is openly gay ! Can we be sure that "Left Behind" Tim isn't just as hypocritical with his pro-pretrib stance? (If you're man or woman enough, warm up your computer and type in "Pretrib Hypocrisy," "LaHaye's Temperament," "Tim LaHaye's gay son," "God to Same-Sexers: Hurry Up," and "Thieves' Marketing"----for starters!)
     2005: In the August "Pre-Trib Perspectives" Thomas Ice again had the audacity to claim that the late Prof. Paul Alexander saw a "pretribulational translation" in Pseudo-Ephraem's now famous Medieval sermon. But Ice has known since 1995 that Alexander's 1985 book has textual as well as outline summaries of P-E's chronological order of endtime events----both summaries showing only one final coming of Christ that follows the great tribulation and not even a hint of a pretrib coming in either summary! Is it possible that Ice knows more than the professor whose book somehow inspired one of the desperate pretrib diehards? As Eph. 4:14 puts it, Ice knows how to "lie in wait to deceive." And lie and lie! (See my internet paper "Deceiving and Being Deceived" and discover the calculated dishonesty in the Pseudo-Ephraem and Morgan Edwards claims plus other dishonesty including massive plagiarism in some of today's leading pretrib diehards! Type in my name and see all of my internet items. Since Ice and LaHaye are associated with the Pre-Trib Research Center which has its own site, you may feel inspired to write them, ask them some blunt questions, and even send them a copy of this paper.)
 
     PS - You can win $1000.00 if you can prove that I have ever covered up or watered down any crucial aspect of pretrib rapture history! If you would like to obtain my No. 1 book on pretrib history entitled "The Rapture Plot" which expands the info in this paper and has much other documentation, call 800.643.4645. 
       
What People Are Saying About the Rapture Plot by Dave MacPherson!
    
 



Gary DeMar (President American Vision): "A majority of prophecy writers and speakers teach that the church will be raptured before a future tribulational period. But did you know that prior to about 1830 no such doctrine existed. No one in all of church history ever taught pretribulational rapture. Dave MacPherson does the work of a journalistic private investigator to uncover the truth....The Rapture Plot is the never-before-told true story of the plot - how plagiarism and subtle document changes created the 'mother of all revisionisms.' A fascinating piece of detective work." Robert H. Gundry (Professor Westmont College): "As usual MacPherson out hustles his opponents in research on primary sources. C. S. Lovett (President Personal Christianity): You don't read very much of Dave MacPherson's work before you realize he is a dedicated researcher. Because his work has been so honest and open his latest work The Rapture Plot has produced many red faces among some of the most recognized rapture writers of our time. When their work is compared to his it is embarrassing for them to see how shallow their research is." R. J. Rushdoony (President Chalcedon): "Dave MacPherson has been responsible for major change in the eschatology of evangelical churches by his devastating studies of some of the central aspects thereof. In The Rapture Plot MacPherson tells us of the strange tale of 'rapture' writings, revisions, cover-ups, alterations and confusions. No one has equaled MacPherson in his research on the 'pretrib rapture.' Attempts to discredit his work have failed...." 
                                                



About the Author: Born 1932 of Scotch/English descent Dave MacPherson is a natural for British historical research. His calling was journalism. Receiving a BA in English in 1955 he spent 26 years as a newsman reporting and filming many notable events persons presidents and dignitaries.









For information about this blog and books written by this author, please click on Joe Ortiz


Friday, February 27, 2015

Process of Writing "The End Times Passover" Included Bible-Based Confirmation as well as Figures of Speech and Etymology!

The two academic processes used to research and write The End Times Passover and Why Christians Will Suffer Great Tribulation included the grammatical science of Etymology and Figures of Speech!


     In order to best understand the two processes we used to examine deeply key words and phrases in the Bible, one has to know the precise meaning of “Etymology” and “Figures of Speech.”
     When we began the research needed to accurately write our two books, The End Times Passover and Why Christians Will Suffer Great Tribulation, we were neither content nor satisfied with just reading the Bible and hundreds of commentaries. Nor did we simply use just one or two versions of the Bible, but actually had a dozen or so available, even though we mostly wrote the verses contained in the King James and the New International Bible, which are probably the most quoted.
     Not resting solely on the understanding these versions conveyed to us, we undertook an expanded study approach to not only glean the meaning of key words and phrases found in the Bible (with such tools and Greek and Hebrew dictionaries and concordances) we sought out the wisdom of several great bible scholars who wrote many of these useful books as well as other academic processes to gain deeper insights to God’s word and the initial intent of scripture. These great scholars included hundreds of today’s contemporary writers and authors, but also much of the writings from the early fathers of the church to classical theologians such as Matthew Henry, W.E. Vine, Francis Brown, S.R. Driver, Charles A. Briggs, Ungers & White, E.W. Bullinger and others from times gone by.
     One of these academic tools we used is the study of ‘Figures of Speech’ as presented by one of the greatest theologians of antiquity, E.W.Bullinger (December 15, 1837 – June 6, 1913). While Bullinger himself adopted the premillennialist dispensational doctrine, he is recognized by many scholars and students of theology as one of the most prolific theologians in recent history. In addition to his many books and articles (including his Commentary on Revelation), Bullinger also wrote two great books on the subjects of numbers and the astrology as it relates to scripture and their significance in the Bible, “Numbers in Scripture” and “Witness to the Stars.” Whether people believe or accepted his thesis on these matters, one could not question the accepted grammatical science he utilized to arrive at his conclusions.
     However, one of his most renowned and prolific works was his book  “Figures of Speech Used in the Bible,” which is a work based not on theory nor conjecture, but solely in the science of proper English grammar. This is a book that neither serious Bible scholar nor student should be without, for the wealth and breadth of academic acumen it contains as it relates to theological topics. It is ironic that albeit Bullinger was an avowed dispensationalist, his academic work actually refutes his premillennialist conclusions. Nevertheless, in his book, Bullinger examined carefully almost every phrase written in the Bible and provided deeper insights to the intent of the words and phrases used by the writers (the translators of the Bible into English from both Greek and Hebrew text) of that period of time. It is obvious that the English language used today has evolved from its contextual origins into a form that would appear not only odd to its inventors, but blasphemous in its usage. To best grasp the many conclusions we arrive at in my two books, having a better understanding of the English language of that period compared to what we use today is crucial in determining more specifically the true meaning of key words in the Bible. Please click on the Figure of Speech for the more concise insight to the process used throughout the writing of these two books.
     The other scientific approach we took in our extensive research, to best understand the true meaning of key words in the Bible, is Etymology.  Etymology is the study of the history of words, their origins, and how their form and meaning have changed over time.
     The word "etymology" (/ɛtɨˈmɒlədʒi/) derives from Greek τυμολογία (etumologíā); from τυμον (étumon), meaning "true sense", and -λογία (-logía), meaning "study"; from λόγος (lógos), meaning "speech, account, reason."
     While the majority of writers and authors of prophecy books have (as they claim) used a literal translation of the Bible (supposedly being in accordance with, conforming to, or upholding the exactness or primary meaning of a word or words), they have failed to arrive at a much deeper meaning of key words in the Bible due to interpreting the specific word that are contained solely in whatever Bible version they used to arrive at their “literal” translation.
     Whereas a Greek or Hebrew word can be found in their respective dictionaries to provide its literal interpretation, the science of Etymology and Figures of Speech provide the student with a more in depth meaning to words and phrases. For example The Greek word for mansions in John 14:2 is the Greek noun mone which is used only twice in the entire Bible, found in both John 14:2 and John 14:23, and it is a noun translated as a staying, an abiding, denoting an abode. It is strange that if (as Bible scholars and theorists interpret) our final destination is a mansion or an abode in the sky, implying it is a heavenly compartment of sorts, that it is mentioned only twice in the entire Bible.
     As we further examine the word mone, it is the Greek noun used here for mansions or abodes, as we read in W. E. Vine’s great book, An Expository Dictionary of Bible Words:  
     The Greek word for mansions or abode used in John 14:2 and 23, is a noun, and W. E. Vine states that it is: “primarily "a staying, abiding" (akin to meno, "to abide"), denotes an "abode" (Eng., "manor," "manse," etc.), translated "mansions" in John 14:2; "abode" in John 14:23There is nothing in the word to indicate separate compartments in heaven; neither does it suggest temporary resting places on the road.” (W. E. Vine, An Expository Dictionary of Bible Words”, Thomas Nelson Publishers, pages 711, 712.) [Bold and underline is by the author solely for emphasis]
     The Greek word mone (remember, translated as mansions in John 14:2 in several versions) is the same word rendered abode in John 14:23.  An important question needs to be asked here. If Vine and other Greek translators interpret the Greek noun mone as “a staying, an abiding, an abode” in John 14:2, and translators believe that mone can be translated to mean a mansion (or many mansions), then surely we could view this Greek noun mone to also mean mansion in John 14:23. If this exegesis is correct, then in John 14:23 it appears that Jesus is telling us that He and the Father are planning to come to earth to make their heavenly abode with those who love and keep His word.       
     Obviously, having a greater understanding as to the etymology of a word can present an entirely different picture of what the Bible is trying to tell us, other than what we instantly interpret what other theorists contend.
     Therefore, whereas many critics of varying eschatological data have termed our work as “self-interpreting,” the information we present in The End Times Passover and Why Christians Will Suffer Great Tribulation is actually derived from what a myriad of scholars and academicians have presented for centuries based on their own empirical research rather than our own speculation, assumption, conjecture, inference and or our suggestion. 
     At its worst, what can be said about our presentation is that it’s a work of sheer plagiarism and nothing new or novel whatsoever. We just connected the dots.

To access the author's blog sites and more information about his two books, please click on Joe Ortiz.

Shakes Coming to Rapturists! by Dave MacPherson



     It's now 12:03 AM on Feb. 26.
     The internet's "Drudge Report" has some scary headlines about government takeover of the internet - headlines like "GOV'T NET GRAB GOING TOO FAR!," "Plan Could Lead to UN Takeover of Internet," "SOROS CASH BEHIND PUSH," etc.
     So I'd better hurry up and share this brand-new item of mine before experiencing the kind of web censorship now going on in some other countries.
     I had heard of the "Harlem Shake" dance craze (with obscene and erotic motions) but was shaken to learn it's been happening among students at even fundamentalist Christian schools like Liberty University, Cedarville University, and even Moody Bible Institute. Students at those schools are presently and proudly showing their "Harlem Shake" gyrations on even worldwide You Tube videos!
     What's puzzling is that those students seem to have more freedom to air their carnality worldwide than they have freedom to publicly disagree with the 185-year-old pretrib rapture view found in the doctrinal statements of those same schools!
     Although I'm not a prophet, I predict that a lot of Christian university and Bible school students here in the United States of Apostasy will someday be doing the "No Rapture Shake" when their much ballyhooed pretrib rapture fails to show up before the Antichrist does!
     For some other shakes right now, Google "Pretrib Rapture Stealth," "Pretrib Rapture Pride," and "Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty." Many of my other articles can be found on blogs created by my good friend Joe Ortiz.

Dave MacPherson. What People are saying
What They Are Saying About ... THE RAPTURE PLOT!
Gary DeMar (President American Vision): "A majority of prophecy writers and speakers teach that the church will be raptured before a future tribulational period. But did you know that prior to about 1830 no such doctrine existed. No one in all of church history ever taught pretribulational rapture. Dave MacPherson does the work of a journalistic private investigator to uncover the truth....The Rapture Plot is the never-before-told true story of the plot - how plagiarism and subtle document changes created the 'mother of all revisionisms.' A fascinating piece of detective work." Robert H. Gundry (Professor Westmont College): "As usual MacPherson out hustles his opponents in research on primary sources. C. S. Lovett (President Personal Christianity): You don't read very much of Dave MacPherson's work before you realize he is a dedicated researcher. Because his work has been so honest and open his latest work The Rapture Plot has produced many red faces among some of the most recognized rapture writers of our time. When their work is compared to his it is embarrassing for them to see how shallow their research is." R. J. Rushdoony (President Chalcedon): "Dave MacPherson has been responsible for major change in the eschatology of evangelical churches by his devastating studies of some of the central aspects thereof. In The Rapture Plot MacPherson tells us of the strange tale of 'rapture' writings, revisions, cover-ups, alterations and confusions. No one has equaled MacPherson in his research on the 'pretrib rapture.' Attempts to discredit his work have failed...."




About the Author: 
Born 1932 of Scotch/English descent Dave MacPherson is a natural for British historical research. His calling was journalism. Receiving a BA in English in 1955 he spent 26 years as a newsman reporting and filming many notable events persons presidents and dignitaries.

Sunday, February 08, 2015

Pretrib Rapture & Ed Hindson by Dave MacPherson


     Dr. Ed Hindson's 2010 article "What To Do If You're Left Behind" inspired the following.]

     What a wishy-washy ingrate Ed Hindson is! 
     He received most of his doctorates from (non-pretrib) schools like Westminster Theological Seminary. See his bio on Wikipedia.
     But Jerry Falwell's deep pockets at close-minded (pretrib) Liberty University bribed Hindson into becoming an alma mater backstabber as well as a slavish pretrib plagiarist. 
     I discovered years ago that "The Fundamentalist Phenomenon" (a book on fundamentalist history dated 1981 and edited by Jerry Falwell, Ed Dobson, and Ed Hindson) had quietly and monstrously pirated huge portions of Bob Jones University professor George Dollar's 1973 book "A History of Fundamentalism in America"!
     Google "Appendix F: Thou Shalt Not Steal" (which is part of my book "The Rapture Plot") to see shocking evidence of all this with side-by-side quotes. In my book I quoted 96 lines in the Falwell production that were either carbon copies or almost carbon copies of corresponding lines in the Dollar work without giving Dollar proper attribution! Here's a sample of the plagiarism:
     On pp. 93-98 Dollar wrote: "Harry Emerson Fosdick...was born near Buffalo, New York, on May 24, 1878...he attended Colgate, where he...revolted against orthodox views....transferring to Union Seminary and Columbia University....One major influence on Fosdick at Union was the stress on the social application....He found the social gospel of Rauschenbusch...challenging....The National Broadcasting Company was so impressed by his stature that it gave him free time on Sundayafternoon for 'National Vespers'...."
     On p. 104 Falwell et al wrote: "Harry Emerson Fosdick...was born in Buffalo, New York, on May 24, 1878. He attended Colgate...where he revolted against...orthodox teachings.... transferred to Union Seminary and Columbia University. At Union he was influenced by the importance of a social consciousness.He was challenged by the influence of Rauschenbusch...the pioneer champion of the social gospel....His pulpit ministry was so impressive that the National Broadcast Company allowed him free time on Sunday afternoon for the broadcast of the 'National Vespers.' "
     On pp. 217-218 Dollar wrote: "Noel Smith...has been especially effective in uncovering unbiblical teachings among Southern Baptists. He has been equally sharp in his criticisms of communism, the National and World Councils of Churches, and Modernism....He has been openly against Billy Graham's evangelism...."
     On pp. 126-127 Falwell et al wrote: "Noel Smith...devoted his energies to such matters as error among Southern Baptists, dealing with communism, the National and World councils of churches, and modernism. Through the years he also dealt with the issues of Billy Graham's evangelism...."
     One member of Falwell's writing team - Ed Dobson - told me in a letter that he had apologized. But Hindson and Falwell never apologized for their part in the literary piracy!
     Some Google articles that Hindson wouldn't want anyone to read include "Famous Rapture Watchers," "Pretrib Rapture Diehards," "Pretrib Rapture Secrecy," "Margaret Macdonald's Rapture Chart," "Edward Irving is Unnerving," "Scholars Weigh My Research," "Pretrib Rapture Politics," "Pretrib Rapture Stealth" and (most shocking of all) "Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty." (Many articles of mine are on various blogs managed by media figure Joe Ortiz.)
     Maybe Ed Hindson, the Dean of Liberty University's School of Religion, should change his name to Ed (Left Behind)son!
 
Dave MacPherson. What People are saying
What They Are Saying About ... THE RAPTURE PLOT!
Gary DeMar (President American Vision): "A majority of prophecy writers and speakers teach that the church will be raptured before a future tribulational period. But did you know that prior to about 1830 no such doctrine existed. No one in all of church history ever taught pretribulational rapture. Dave MacPherson does the work of a journalistic private investigator to uncover the truth....The Rapture Plot is the never-before-told true story of the plot - how plagiarism and subtle document changes created the 'mother of all revisionisms.' A fascinating piece of detective work." Robert H. Gundry (Professor Westmont College): "As usual MacPherson out hustles his opponents in research on primary sources. C. S. Lovett (President Personal Christianity): You don't read very much of Dave MacPherson's work before you realize he is a dedicated researcher. Because his work has been so honest and open his latest work The Rapture Plot has produced many red faces among some of the most recognized rapture writers of our time. When their work is compared to his it is embarrassing for them to see how shallow their research is." R. J. Rushdoony (President Chalcedon): "Dave MacPherson has been responsible for major change in the eschatology of evangelical churches by his devastating studies of some of the central aspects thereof. In The Rapture Plot MacPherson tells us of the strange tale of 'rapture' writings, revisions, cover-ups, alterations and confusions. No one has equaled MacPherson in his research on the 'pretrib rapture.' Attempts to discredit his work have failed...."


About the Author: Born 1932 of Scotch/English descent Dave MacPherson is a natural for British historical research. His calling was journalism. Receiving a BA in English in 1955 he spent 26 years as a newsman reporting and filming many notable events persons presidents and dignitaries.


Saturday, February 07, 2015

Paul's Letter to Titus (Or, Are you qualified to Handle the Word of God?)

Who was Titus and why did Paul trust him enough to pass on to him probably one of the most important instructions concerning the criteria to be an “elder with the responsibility of training disciples” in order to build a strong foundation in that local church?

Although not mentioned in the Acts of the ApostlesTitus was noted in Galatians (cf. Gal. 2:1, 3) where Paul wrote of journeying to Jerusalem with Barnabas, accompanied by Titus. He was then dispatched to Corinth, Greece, where he successfully reconciled the Christian community there with Paul, its founder. Titus was later left on the island of Crete to help organize the Church, although he soon went to Dalmatia (now Croatia).

According to Eusebius of Caesarea in the Ecclesiastical History, he served as the first bishop of Crete. He was buried in Cortyna (Gortyna), Crete; his head was later removed to Venice during the invasion of Crete by the Saracens in 832 and was enshrined in St. Mark’s, Venice, Italy. It is obvious by Titus’ ability to “reconcile” a group of believers, and then later to organize the first church in Crete that he was highly qualified not only to be an elder, but to recruit and train disciples to be elders as well. Titus is a great example of what we read in 1Timothy 5:17-18: About Honoring Elders:

17 The elders who rule well are to be considered worthy of double honor, especially those who work hard at preaching and teaching. 18For the Scripture says, "YOU SHALL NOT MUZZLE THE OX WHILE HE IS THRESHING," and "The laborer is worthy of his wages."…(1 Timothy 5:17-18)”

Unfortunately we see very little of this honor being displayed on the Internet Church, as opposed to the myriad of loose cannons and self-anointed charlatans that surface on Facebook daily. Sadly, there is no accountability whatsoever (if we are to judge by Bible standards) with the credibility required by scripture of the many who have formed their own church, radio show or blogs on the Internet, shy of their proclamation that “the Lord told me,” or the “Holy Spirit” confirmed my ministry. If these individuals were to pass through the scriptural gauntlet of the original Apostles, they would end up with more rolled-up parchment welts on their hearts and souls than any true blessings from God.

Following is the letter that Paul sent Titus. We won’t examine each of the criteria (failing one alone is sufficiently burdensome to eliminate them from consideration) but these ersatz "men of God" are loose and troublesome and alive and well on the world, wide web:
“Paul, a servant of God and an apostle of Jesus Christ for the faith of God's elect and the knowledge of the truth that leads to godliness-- 
2 a faith and knowledge resting on the hope of eternal life, which God, who does not lie, promised before the beginning of time, 
3 and at his appointed season he brought his word to light through the preaching entrusted to me by the command of God our Savior, 
4 To Titus, my true son in our common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior.
5 The reason I left you in Crete was that you might straighten out what was left unfinished and appoint elders in every town, as I directed you. 
6 An elder must be blameless, the husband of but one wife, a man whose children believe and are not open to the charge of being wild and disobedient. 
7 Since an overseer is entrusted with God's work, he must be blameless--not overbearing, not quick-tempered, not given to drunkenness, not violent, not pursuing dishonest gain. 
8 Rather he must be hospitable, one who loves what is good, who is self-controlled, upright, holy and disciplined. 
9 He must hold firmly to the trustworthy message as it has been taught, so that he can encourage others by sound doctrine and refute those who oppose it. 
10 For there are many rebellious people, mere talkers and deceivers, especially those of the circumcision group. 
11 They must be silenced, because they are ruining whole households by teaching things they ought not to teach--and that for the sake of dishonest gain. 
12 Even one of their own prophets has said, "Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons." 
13 This testimony is true. Therefore, rebuke them sharply, so that they will be sound in the faith 
14 and will pay no attention to Jewish myths or to the commands of those who reject the truth. 
15 To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted and do not believe, nothing is pure. In fact, both their minds and consciences are corrupted. 
16 They claim to know God, but by their actions they deny him. They are detestable, disobedient and unfit for doing anything good, (Titus 1:1-16).”

Phew!
Do you know of any individuals on the Internet who would qualify to be an “elder” among the brethren, much less in your local church? If we were to judge any self-anointed preachers and teachers on the Internet, would he or she pass the criteria that Paul required from Titus to teach and train others for the glory of God and the church of Jesus Christ?

I know I don’t qualify, therefore I can only claim to be a disciple who is willing to share the word of God with others, and also to learn from you!

For more information about the author and his books, web sites and blogs, please click on Joe Ortiz