MICHAEL GRANT: EPHESANS 1:4-5 AND CALVINISM

The Most Common Assumption People Make w/ ELECTION & PREDESTINATION

I found Michael Grant’s recent video on election and predestination profoundly disturbing. Can it really be that God does not want us to clearly understand soteriology? The comments on this video are disabled, which is unsurprising given that it likely attracted substantial criticism.

Michael Grant routinely critiques what he calls the compromised “Evangelical swamp” or the “Christian YouTube Establishment”—figures such as Mike Winger, Wesley Huff, Melissa Dougherty, Ruslan KD, Sean McDowell, and Allen Parr. Yet he appears unaware that he replicates the same pattern in his treatment of John MacArthur and RC Sproul. By affirming, platforming, and refusing to confront their Calvinism, he grants them the same uncritical legitimacy he condemns in others. Functionally, he is participating in the very dynamic he claims to oppose.

MacArthur’s exchange is a textbook example of rhetorical self‑contradiction. He affirms unconditional election, irresistible drawing, sovereign preservation, and a fully predestined soteriology—“all sovereign, all established”—and then immediately affirms universal invitation, divine displeasure at judgment, Christ’s grief over impenitence, and full human responsibility. When pressed to reconcile these mutually exclusive claims, he concedes that he cannot: “You are asking too much of me; I am not God."

Michael Grant presents this as if it were clarifying, yet it functions as epistemic destabilisation. Believers are left with the conclusion that, on his account, we cannot meaningfully know anything about salvation. MacArthur’s bifurcated presentation is not harmless; it is doctrinally disorienting. I have heard him preach full blown Calvinism, and the inconsistency here is not incidental but in my assessment deliberate.

It is vital to note that the claim that "regeneration precedes faith" places a person on the edge of serious doctrinal error. It introduces a soteriological model that is not merely problematic but ventures into heresy. The question of how we are saved is foundational: scripture presents salvation by grace, through faith—not by regeneration imposed prior to faith. (Ephesians 2:8). Both RC Sproul and John MacArthur explicitly taught that regeneration precedes faith. Given that commitment, it is difficult to see why anyone would treat them as reliable guides for sound soteriology. I have observed that Michael Grant frequently speaks inconsistently (as demonstrated in his comments about Charlie Kirk). This underscores the need for clarity in doctrine rather than reliance on sources that are theologically unstable and have no place in sound teaching.

Ephesians 1:4 is one of the most cited “proof texts” in Calvinist (Reformed) theology, but it is also a central point of contention with non-Calvinist interpreters. While Ephesians 1:4 does not mention “foreknowledge", Romans 8:29 and 1 Peter 1:20 show that God’s knowledge of individuals and His redemptive plan existed before creation.

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places, even as he chose us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and blameless before him. In love he predestined us for adoption to himself as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will, to the praise of his glorious grace, with which he has blessed us in the Beloved. (Ephesians 1:3-6).

Calvinists, following John Calvin and later Reformed theologians, read “he chose us in him” as an assertion that God eternally selected specific individuals for salvation before creation, without reference to any foreseen faith, conduct, or human response. In this framework, “in Him” designates Christ as the ground or medium of the decree, while the election itself remains an unconditional, individual, pre‑temporal act. This interpretation functions within their broader system of unconditional election and, for some, double predestination.

Critics of the Calvinist reading argue that the text does not teach an eternal, individual choice apart from faith: They note the phrase “chosen in Him” means that God chose those who are in Christ — i.e., believers — before the foundation of the world. According to this view, the “us” in verse 4 is the same “us” in verse 19: “you who have believed” (Ephesians 1:19). The choice is corporate and conditional on being in Christ, which itself comes through hearing and believing the gospel (Ephesians 1:13). Thus, the verse describes God’s eternal plan to bless believers, not a pre‑temporal selection of a hidden “elect” group apart from faith.

Scripture is unequivocal: regeneration is the sovereign act of God in which He imparts His own life and nature to the believing sinner. (John 1:12–13; Titus 3:5). The surrounding debate typically centres on the TULIP framework—total depravity, unconditional election, limited atonement, irresistible grace, and the perseverance of the saints. A key point of contention is the order of salvation: does faith precede regeneration, or does regeneration precede faith? Closely related is the question of repentance—whether it must occur prior to salvation. These are precisely the areas in which Calvinist theology often entangles believers, producing confusion rather than clarity. Numerous passages indicate that regeneration is inseparably linked to repentance and faith.

Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, every one according to his ways, declares the Lord God. Repent and turn from all your transgressions, lest iniquity be your ruin. Cast away from you all the transgressions that you have committed, and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit! Why will you die, O house of Israel? For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Lord God; so turn, and live.” (Ezekiel 18:30-32).

When they heard these things they fell silent. And they glorified God, saying, “Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life. (Acts 11:18).

yet you refuse to come to me that you may have life. (John 5:40).

So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. (John 6:53).

As the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever feeds on me, he also will live because of me. (John 6:57).

but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. (John 20:31).

..and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith. (Acts 15:9).

But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God. (John 1:12-13).

for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. Galatians 3:26

While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light.” When Jesus had said these things, he departed and hid himself from them. (John 12:36).

In him you also, when you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, and believed in him, were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit.. (Ephesians 1:13).

Let me ask you only this: Did you receive the Spirit by works of the law or by hearing with faith? ..Does he who supplies the Spirit to you and works miracles among you do so by works of the law, or by hearing with faith— just as Abraham “believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness”? (Galatians 3:2, 5-6).

But their minds were hardened. For to this day, when they read the old covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away. Yes, to this day whenever Moses is read a veil lies over their hearts. But when one turns to the Lord, the veil is removed. (2 Corinthians 3:14-16).

But I received mercy for this reason, that in me, as the foremost, Jesus Christ might display his perfect patience as an example to those who were to believe in him for eternal life. (1 Timothy 1:16).

having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. (Colossians 2:12).

Of his own will he brought us forth by the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures. (James 1:18).

For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the firstborn among many brothers. (Romans 8:29).

Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To the elect who are exiles of the Dispersion throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, in the sanctification of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood: May grace and peace be multiplied to you. (1 Peter 1:1-2).

Many people underestimate how calculated and intellectually deceptive these individuals are.

Do not let anyone destabilize you from your secure position in Christ with clever‑sounding arguments. (Colossians 2:8 cf. Ephesians 4:14; 1 Peter 5:8). 

WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING: FALSE PROPHETS AND BIBLE TEACHERS IN THE LAST DAYS: JAMES WHITE: 1 JOHN 5:1 > PERFECT TENSE MISINFORMATION

JOEL RICHARDSON'S SCRIPTURE TWISTING: "THE ASSYRIAN"

The Death of the Assyrian: The Antichrist Prophecies Most Christians Miss

Joel Richardson continues to distort the relevant texts in order to sustain his claim that “the Assyrian” Gog of Magog is the Antichrist. In this video, his case relies on misusing Isaiah chapters 30-31 and related passages under the manufactured category of “the coming of Yahweh texts” presented as if they were direct predictions of the Messiah’s return—a central New Testament theme he attempts to retroject into the Old Testament. 

Behold, the Name of the LORD comes from afar, with burning anger and dense smoke. His lips are full of fury, and His tongue is like a consuming fire. His breath is like a rushing torrent that rises to the neck. He comes to sift the nations in a sieve of destruction; He bridles the jaws of the peoples to lead them astray.. (Isaiah 30:27-28).

And the LORD will cause His majestic voice to be heard and His mighty arm to be revealed, striking in angry wrath with a flame of consuming fire, and with cloudburst, storm, and hailstones. For Assyria will be shattered at the voice of the LORD; He will strike them with His scepter. And with every stroke of the rod of punishment that the LORD brings down on them, the tambourines and lyres will sound as He battles with weapons brandished. For Topheth has long been prepared; it has been made ready for the king. Its funeral pyre is deep and wide, with plenty of fire and wood. The breath of the LORD, like a torrent of burning sulfur, sets it ablaze. (Isaiah 30:30-33).

These verses are not eschatological. They belong to a historical judgment oracle against Assyria within the 8th‑century crisis addressed in Isaiah 28–35. The text employs standard theophanic imagery to depict Yahweh’s intervention against a specific empire, not the future return of Christ. They contain none of Isaiah’s recognized eschatological markers found in genuine end‑time passages (Isaiah 24–27; 34; 65–66): no “in that day” formula, no universal judgment, no cosmic upheaval, no restoration sequence. Treating this Assyrian‑focused oracle as a second coming prophecy is a categorical error that collapses historical theophany into eschatology.

And the Assyrian shall fall by a sword, not of man; and a sword, not of man, shall devour him; and he shall flee from the sword, and his young men shall be put to forced labor. His rock shall pass away in terror, and his officers desert the standard in panic,” declares the Lord, whose fire is in Zion, and whose furnace is in Jerusalem. (Isaiah 31:8-9).

Richardson misreads “furnace” treating it as a literal reference to the lake of fire. In Isaiah, however, Zion denotes Jerusalem, and the imagery of “fire” signals God’s presence, protection, judgment, and—within Isaiah’s own framework—purification and refinement. (Isaiah 4:4; Deuteronomy 4:24). 

Context: Isaiah 31 addresses the people of Judah during a time of political tension, around 705–701 BC, when Assyria threatened the region and Judah considered seeking military aid from Egypt. The chapter reassures that God’s plans are wise and unchangeable; He will act against the Assyrians and their allies, fulfilling His promises through divine intervention rather than human military might. (Isaiah 31:2-3, 8-9).

Historically Isaiah 31 was fulfilled in 701 BC, when Assyria fell “by a sword not of man” during Sennacherib’s invasion of Judah. The chapter’s core prediction—Assyria’s destruction without human military action—matches the historical event recorded in Isaiah 37:36, where the angel of the LORD struck down 185,000 Assyrian soldiers. Some modern interpreters including Richardson attempt to relocate the fulfilment to an Antichrist scenario, but this is not supported by the chapter’s structure, grammar, or historical referents. No second eschatological fulfilment is textually indicated.   

And the angel of the Lord went out and struck down 185,000 in the camp of the Assyrians. And when people arose early in the morning, behold, these were all dead bodies. Then Sennacherib king of Assyria departed and returned home and lived at Nineveh. And as he was worshiping in the house of Nisroch his god, Adrammelech and Sharezer, his sons, struck him down with the sword. And after they escaped into the land of Ararat, Esarhaddon his son reigned in his place. (Isaiah 37:36-38).

Like birds hovering, so the LORD of hosts will protect Jerusalem; he will protect and deliver it; he will spare and rescue it.” (Isaiah 31:5 ESV).

Richardson’s line, “Like a bird in the sky…,” is textually imprecise; whatever translation he is using, the phrase does not refer to the rapture, and the imagery is plural rather than singular.

Keil and Delitzsch "Jehovah suddenly arrests the work of punishment, and the love which the wrath enfolds within itself begins to appear. "Like fluttering birds, so will Jehovah of Hosts screen Jerusalem; screening and delivering, sparing and setting free." The prophet uses the plural, "like fluttering birds," with an object - namely, not so much to represent Jehovah Himself, as the tender care and, as it were, maternal love, into which His leonine fierceness would be changed. This is indicated by the fact, that he attaches the feminine ‛âphōth to the common gender tsippŏrı̄m. The word pâsōăch recals to mind the deliverance from Egypt (as in Isaiah 30:29) in a very significant manner. The sparing of the Israelites by the destroyer passing over their doors, from which the passover derived its name, would be repeated once more. We may see from this, that in and along with Assyria, Jehovah Himself, whose instrument of punishment Assyria was, would take the filed against Jerusalem (Isaiah 29:2-3); but His attitude towards Jerusalem is suddenly changed into one resembling the action of birds, as they soar round and above their threatened nests."1 

Daniel 8 and Daniel 2 both describe the final adversary being destroyed without human agency. These passages are eschatological and refer to the Antichrist; they do not point back to the historical destruction of Sennacherib’s forces in Isaiah as Richardson claims. 

And he shall be their peace. When the Assyrian comes into our land and treads in our palaces we will raise against him seven shepherds and eight princes of men; they shall shepherd the land of Assyria with the sword, and the land of Nimrod at its entrances; and he shall deliver us from the Assyrian when he comes into our land and treads within our border. (Micah 5:4-5).

Micah 5:5–6 operates within a millennial, eschatological setting. It describes conditions during the 1,000‑year reign, not before it. Because Revelation is explicit that the Antichrist is destroyed and cast into the lake of fire before the millennium begins (Revelation 19:20, 20:10), he cannot appear within the millennial period. This makes any identification of the figure in Micah 5:5–6 with the Antichrist impossible. 

Micah 4–5 moves from historical siege language to messianic and eschatological themes—the Bethlehem ruler, the restoration of the remnant, and the final defeat of Israel’s future enemies. In Micah 5:5–6, “the Assyrian” functions as an archetypal enemy figure. It is a type of the Antichrist, but it does not imply that the Antichrist will be ethnically or historically Assyrian. It is a literary type, not a genealogical descriptor The bible does not assign the Antichrist an ethnicity. Any ethnic assignment is extra-biblical and speculative.

The Lord has given commandment about you: “No more shall your name be perpetuated; from the house of your gods I will cut off the carved image and the metal image. I will make your grave, for you are vile.” Behold, upon the mountains, the feet of him who brings good news, who publishes peace! Keep your feasts, O Judah; fulfill your vows, for never again shall the worthless pass through you; he is utterly cut off. (Nahum 1:14-15).

Nahum 1:14–15 is historical, referring to the fall of Nineveh in 612 BC. Its language is later used typologically in eschatological contexts, but the passage itself does not describe the Antichrist or end‑time events. 

Richardson’s central difficulty is obvious: Scripture states explicitly in non symbolic language that the Antichrist and false prophet are thrown alive into the lake of fire. (Revelation 19:19–21). Richardson dismisses this as a “silly” objection and reinterprets clear language as apocalyptic metaphor, claiming the Antichrist is described both as “buried” and “thrown alive". Given his repeated mishandling of key texts, there is every reason to affirm the plain reading: the Antichrist and the false prophet are cast alive into the lake of fire, not buried. Nothing in the passage signals metaphor. 

I have addressed Richardson’s false teaching in earlier posts, and I also recommend Chris White’s detailed rebuttal of his claims.*

*The Islamic Antichrist Theory Debunked – The Assyrian (Part 4) | Bible Prophecy Daily

1. Isaiah 31 Keil and Delitzsch OT Commentary

CHRIS QUINTANA: PRETRIB DISINGENUOUS TRANSLATIONS FROM ANCIENT MANUSCRIPTS

Did John Darby Invent the Pre Tribulation Rapture?

The pre‑tribulation camp’s selective handling of ancient manuscripts is academically indefensible. Accurate translation and authorial intent are essential safeguards for believers, precisely because misreadings create doctrinal vulnerabilities. (1 John 4:1). The pretribulation rapture is a serious interpretive error, and unless it is clearly refuted, it will continue to cultivate a false expectation that leaves many unprepared for what the biblical text actually describes.

Pseudo Ephraem

Pseudo‑Ephraem does not teach a pretribulation rapture; his writings describe the righteous escaping the tribulation through death, not a supernatural removal of the Church before the tribulation. 

The passages cited by the Pre‑Trib Research Center and other pre‑trib advocates are drawn from two later homiletic works: the Latin Sermon on the Last Times, the Antichrist, and the End of the World and the Greek Sermon on Repentance and Judgment and the Separation of Soul and Body.1 These are the sources routinely invoked in attempts to anchor pretribulationism in antiquity. You will not find any pretrib interpreter quoting from Syriac Pseudo-Ephraem which is the original text. The Syriac Pseudo‑Ephraem is 7th‑century, and the Latin version reflects a late‑6th‑ to early‑7th‑century composition preserved in later manuscripts. A commonly extracted line (below) is presented by Quintana as decisive evidence, despite its removal from the broader apocalyptic context in which it appears. 

The translation quoted by Chris Quintana, (supplied by Lee Brainard) is from the Latin Pseudo-Ephraem: "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."

Syraic Pseudo-Ephraem: "Pronouncing the good fortune of the deceased Who had avoided the calamity: 'Blessed are you for you were borne away (to the grave) And hence you escaped from the afflictions!

An Excerpt from Syriac Pseudo Ephraem

Pronouncing the good fortune of the deceased Who had avoided the calamity: 'Blessed are you for you were borne away (to the grave) And hence you escaped from the afflictions! But as for us, woe is us! For when we die, Vultures will serve as escort for us!' And if the days of that time were not shortened, The elect would never survive The calamities and afflictions. For Our Lord revealed (and) disclosed to us In his Gospel when He said: 'Those days will be shortened For the sake of the elect and the saints.' And when he has harassed the whole of creation, (When) the Son of Destruction (has bent it) to his will, Enoch and Elijah will be sent That they might persuade the Evil One. With a gentle question The saints will come before him, In order to expose the Son of Destruction Before the assemblies surrounding him: 'If you are indeed God, Tell us what we ask of you: Where is the place that you have hidden The elders Elijah and Enoch?' The Evil One will respond and say To the saints at that time: 'When I wish (it), they are in the height(s), Or again should I choose, they are within the sea; For I have authority over habitations, Since there is no other god apart from me And I can make anything On earth (and) also in heaven!' They will answer The Son of Destruction as follows: 'If you are truly God, Call out to the deceased so that they will rise! For it is written within the books Of the prophets and the apostles That when the Messiah reveals Himself, He will resurrect the dead from the graves. If you cannot show us this (sign), Then the One who was crucified is greater than you! For he roused and resurrected those who were dead, And was exalted in great splendor.' Then the Evil One will become enraged With the saints at that time; He will draw his terrible sword And sever the necks of the righteous ones.2

Apokalypsis anastaseōs

Nathanael Holmes’s Apokalypsis anastaseōs (1653) is a separate, later Protestant apocalyptic treatise, while the “Apocalypse of Anastasia” is an earlier Eastern Orthodox visionary text — they share the word “Anastasia” but are unrelated in origin and purpose. 

Apokalypsis anastaseōs page 494-5

"after this our gathering together* 8.293 unto Christ at his comming (so the Apostle calls this rapture, 2 Thess. 2.1.) wee shall from hence∣forth never lose his presence, but alwayes enjoy it, partly on earth, during his reigne of the thousand yeers, and partly in heaven, when we shall bee translated thither. For it cannot be concluded, because the Text saith, the Saints after their rapture on high, should thence∣forth be ever with the Lord; Therefore they shall from thence∣forth be in heaven; for no heaven is here mentioned. If they must needs be with Christ there, where they are to meet him; it would rather follow, they should be ever with him in the aire, then in heaven, which I suppose none will admit. And otherwise the Text will afford no more for heaven, then it will for earth; nay the words [he shall bring them with him] make most for the latter. 4 I will adde this more, namely, what may be conceived to be the cause of this rapture of the Saints on high to meet the Lord in the clouds, rather then to wait his comming to the earth. What if it bee, that they may be preserved during the conflagration of the earth, and the works thereof, 2 Pet. 3.10. That as Noah, and his family were pre∣served from the deluge, by being lift up above the waters in the Ark, so should the Saints at the conflagration bee lift up in the clouds unto their Ark, Christ, to be preserved there from the Deluge of fire, wherein the wicked shall be consumed? There is a tradition of the Jews sounding this way, which they ascribe unto Elias, a Jewish Doctor, whose is that Tradition of the duration of the world, and well knowne among Divines, Duo millia Inane, duo mil∣lia Lex, duo millia dies Messiae, viz. Sex mille annos duraturus est mun∣dus. He lived under the second Temple, about the first times of the Greek Monarchy; so that it is no devise of any later Rabbies, but a Tradition anciently received amongst them whilst they were yet the Church of God. I will transcribe it, because it hath something remarkable concerning the thousand yeers. It sounds thus: Traditio domus Eliae. Justi quos resuscitabit Deus, non redigentur iterum in pulverem. (He means of the first and particular resurrection, before the general, which the Jews acknowledge and talke much of. See Wisdome Chapt. 3. ab initio ad finem, verse 8.) Si quaeras Mille annis ist is, quibus Deus Sanctus Benedictus renova∣turus est mundum suum (de quibus dicitur, Et exaltabitur Dominus solus in die illo, Es. 2.11.) quid just is futurum sit; sciendum quod Deus bene∣dictus dabit illis alas quasi aquilarum, ut volent super facie aquarum: unde dicitur (Psal. 46.3.) Propterea non timebimus cum* 8.294 mutabitur terra. At forte (inquies) erit ipsis dolori seu afflictioni. Sed occurrit illud (Esa. 40.31.) Exspectantibus Dominum innovabunt vires, efferen∣tur alâ instar aquilarum. The Hebrew words are in Gemara Sanhe∣drin, &c. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 The Tradition of the house of Eliah. The just whom God shall raise (viz. in the first resurrection) shall not returne to dust. But if you aske, what shall happen to the just in those thousand yeeres, wherein the holy and blessed God shall renew this World (whereof it is said, Esa. 2.11. And the Lord alone shall be ex∣alted in that day) you must know, that God shall give them the wings as it were of Eagles, to flye upon the face of the waters; for it is said (Psal. 46.3.) Therefore shall wee not feare, when the earth shall bee changed. But you will say, Perhaps it will be to them a paine and trouble; but we are otherwise taught by that in Esa. 40.31. They that wait upon the Lord, shall renew their strength, they shall mount up with wings as Eagles, &c.]"3  

In the earliest usage, a conflagration was a large, destructive fire — sometimes a city-wide blaze, a wildfire, or a catastrophic fire event. The most relevant verses associated with conflagration are Genesis 19:28; Joshua 6:4, 8:20, 11:13; Judges 18:27; 1 Samuel 30:1; 1 Kings 9:16; 2 Chronicles 36:19; Job 1:16.

Watson's Biblical and Theological Dictionary: "Conflagration>  a general burning of a city, or other considerable place. But the word is more ordinarily restrained to that grand period, or catastrophe of our world, wherein the face of nature is expected to be changed by a deluge of fire, as it was anciently by that of water. The ancient Chaldeans, Pythagoreans, Platonists, Epicureans, Stoics, Celts, and Etrurians, appear to have had a notion of the conflagration; though whence they should derive it, unless from the sacred books, it is difficult to conceive; except, perhaps, from the Phenicians, who themselves had it from the Jews. The Celts, whose opinions resembled those of the eastern nations, held, that after the burning of the world, a new period of existence would commence."4

Chris Quintana understands "tribulation" and “conflagration” to be synonyms. However, this is clearly not the case. Conflagration refers to fire, a term consistently associated with orgē (wrath) and not thlipsis (tribulation). This reflects the standard pretrib fallacy that the entire 70th week of Daniel is 'the tribulation', even though the tribulation proper lasts 3.5 years and is followed by the Day of the Lord — the period of divine wrath. (cf. Matthew 24:29-31; Revelation 6:12-17).*  

Despite repeated denials and misplaced counter‑accusations, the historical record is clear: the doctrine of the pretribulation rapture originates in the 19th century with John Nelson Darby and has no attestation in earlier Christian teaching.

Quintana’s derisive response is unfortunate. Pretribulation teachers will answer to God for misleading the church.

*WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING: FALSE PROPHETS AND BIBLE TEACHERS IN THE LAST DAYS: THE SEVEN YEAR TRIBULATION FALLACY

1. Mr. Pseudo Ephraem - The Pre-Trib Research Center
2. John C. Reeves | Pseudo-Ephrem (Syriac)
3. Apokalypsis anastaseåos The resurrection revealed, or, The dawnings of the day-star about to rise and radiate a visible incomparable glory far beyond any since the creation upon the universal church on earth for a thousand yeers yet to come, before the ultimate day of the general judgement to the raising of the Jewes, and ruine of all antichristian and secular powers, that do not love the members of Christ, submit to his laws and advance his interest in this design : digested into seven bookes with a synopsis of the whole treatise and two tables, 1 of scriptures, 2 of things, opened in this treatise / by Dr. Nathanael Homes. | Early English Books Online 2 | University of Michigan Library Digital Collections
4. Conflagration - Watson's Biblical & Theological Dictionary -

7 Pretrib Problems and the Prewrath Rapture (Full Movie)

Prewrath - Early Church Fathers

JAMES WHITE: 1 JOHN 5:1 > PERFECT TENSE MISINFORMATION

1 John 5:1 and the Two Verses Provisionists Won't Touch

Πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων ὅτι Ἰησοῦς ἐστιν ὁ Χριστὸς ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ γεγέννηται, καὶ πᾶς ὁ ἀγαπῶν τὸν γεννήσαντα ἀγαπᾷ τὸν γεγεννημένον ἐξ αὐτοῦ.

Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God, and everyone who loves the Father loves whoever has been born of him.(1 John 5:1).

According to James White, intellectual deficiency is everyone else’s problem, never his. He routinely attempts to belittle opponents by implying they lack competence in Greek or contextual analysis. The performance is meant to project expertise, but it consistently collapses under its own weight. In this instance White claims that provisionists cannot refute his claim that 1 John 5:1 is evidence that the regeneration precedes faith which is the Reformed (Calvinist) soteriological view. I generally avoid theological labels, and I do not identify as a provisionist. Nevertheless various non-provisionist interpreters have answered this question. 

Πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων  >  Everyone believing.. .  ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ γεγέννηται  > has been born of God.   

White: "πιστευων comes from being born of God."

πιστευων is a substantival participle: it is a verbal adjective that functions as a noun >  it describes what someone is doing.      

Parallel passages 

If you know that he is righteous, you may be sure that everyone who practices righteousness has been born of him. (1 John 2:29). 

ἐὰν εἰδῆτε ὅτι δίκαιός ἐστιν, γινώσκετε ὅτι πᾶς ὁ ποιῶν τὴν δικαιοσύνην ἐξ αὐτοῦ γεγέννηται.

..everyone doing righteousness has been born from him . Why do we do righteousness? Because we have been regenerated. The grammar in 1 John 2:29 supports a causal relationship (because one has been regenerated, one practices righteousness), not a temporal sequence (first X happens, then later Y happens). In other words, it is diagnostic, not chronological. There is no temporal marker suggesting 'first regeneration, then later righteousness'. There is no causal marker suggesting 'righteousness causes regeneration'. The construction simply asserts: the one characterized by righteous practice is one whose origin is in God. This is Johannine cause‑and‑effect, but not time‑indexed. The perfect tense encodes state resulting from prior action, not the timing of that action.

The same structure appears in 1 John 4:7: πᾶς ὁ ἀγαπῶν γεγέννηται ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ. We love because we have been born of God. Again, the logic is causal and evidential, not chronological. The observable action (loving) discloses the underlying state (having been begotten of God).

This principle carries directly into 1 John 5:1: πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων … γεγέννηται ἐκ τοῦ Θεοῦ. The participle describes the ongoing state of the believer, and the perfect verb identifies the divine begetting as the underlying cause. It is not a chronological construct but a causal one: the state of believing discloses the prior and continuing reality of having been born of God.

The Perfect Tense in Koine Greek

The perfect tense is not a straightforward mechanical category; its semantic force is nuanced and determined by context. Any argument that hinges on its form alone should be approached critically, all the more when it produces tension with broader scriptural evidence or doctrinal coherence.

The perfect tense conveys aspect, not time. In biblical Greek, aspect is a grammatical property of verbs that describes how the action is presented by the speaker or writer, not when it happens. It is distinct from tense (which marks time: past, present, future) and instead focuses on the internal viewpoint of the action.1

Albasciano: "If ó TTIOTEÚCUU and yeyÉvvriTai are to be related temporally in some way, as seems likely, then the grammar actually suggests that believing and being begot ten of God are portrayed as contemporaneous (or perhaps that believing pre cedes being begotten of God; see below). It is well recognized by most Greek implying that relative temporal significance can obtain in other types of participles, such as substantival ones. Later Wallace indicates explicitly that articular participles can bear a temporal significance relative to the main verb (625-26), as does B. M. Fanning, Verbal Aspect in New Testament Greek (Oxford: Clarendon, 1990), 409. Even more positively. Camphell, Aspect, 122, states that the present substantival participle 'is normally contemporaneous in time frame' (with the main verb of the sentence). And according to William D. Mounce, Basics of Biblical Greek Grammar (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 3rd edn, 2009), § 29.13, 'The present and aorist participles have a relative time significance regardless of whether they are adverbial or adjectival.' In my judgment, it seems that substantival participles do typically suggest time relative to the main verb to some extent because they identify on the basis of action, which usually will have some sort of natural temporal relationship to the action of the main verb. Nevertheless, there may be many exceptions, such as suhstantival participles that function as a mere name or title, and as with time even in the indicative, other factors from the context besides tense form help to determine time with respect to any participle; cf. Wallace, 514-16."2

Alan Kurschner: The perfect tense does not encode 'past action,' as it is commonly thought. This is a dated and fallacious understanding of the Greek verb system, not just the perfect tense, because 'tense' is often associated in English for 'time.' Not so in Greek. Only the context—not the tense-form—construes temporal reference of an action happening in the past, present, or future. When that action happens is construed by the larger context, not the tense-form of a Greek verb. The perfect tense-form communicates the semantic value of aspect, which is how the author chooses to view the action. The perfect sense conveys the aspect of a “state of affairs.” And an author typically chose the perfect tense-form to function as discourse prominence.3 

1. New Testament Greek+1.
2. Abasciano.-Does-Regeneration-Precede-Faith.-The-Use-of-1-John-5.1-as-a-Proof-Text.pdf
3. A Reply to Renald Showers on James 5:7–9, Imminency, and the Meaning of the Greek Perfect Tense - Ep. 44

Kings To You, Fernand.pdf
Perfect Tense Fallacies - by Michael F. Bird

NOAHIDE BEHEADINGS: REALLY?

The First International Congress of Noahides will be held in Jerusalem from November 2–6, 2026, bringing together delegates from six continents to formally establish the World Noahide Movement. conference is organized by the Brit Olam Noahide World Center and marks a historic gathering of Noahides—non-Jews who observe the Seven Laws of Noah. The event aims to found the World Noahide Movement, complete with a founding charter, a rabbinic court (Beit Din), regional councils, and a global infrastructure to sustain the movement.1 It is a highly organized assembly designed to build a worldwide Noahide judicial and political structure. The Congress is reported to include delegates from 20 countries across six continents including Japan, India, Colombia, Nigeria, Philippines, France and the United States. Not surprisingly, this trajectory has prompted extensive speculation that a one‑world religious structure is beginning to take shape. When paired with renewed calls for the reconstruction of a third Jewish temple, the concern intensifies.

The Noahide Laws (Sheva Mitzvot B’nei Noach) are described in Jewish tradition as the minimal moral obligations binding on all people. The Talmud presents the Noahide laws as originating in commands first given to Adam and later reiterated to Noah. It frames the obligations as Adamic in origin, subsequently restated for Noah’s generation.2 The Tanakh depicts God speaking to Noah directly and offers no textual basis for the claim that these laws were previously given to Adam. 

The Noahide laws are seven foundational categories that expand into dozens of specific commandments. Different rabbinic authorities count anywhere from 30+ obligations to more than 50, depending on how the sub‑laws are classified.

Rabbinic tradition treats these laws as universal obligations, applying to all humanity rather than being limited to Israel. 

They claim to form a basic ethical framework emphasizing respect for God, human life, family, property, and justice. 

A non-Jew who follows the Noahide Laws is traditionally called a "Righteous Gentile" and is said to merit a place in the “World to Come”.

Do not worship idols.
Do not blaspheme or curse God.
Do not murder.
Do not commit adultery or sexual immorality (including incest and other forbidden relations).
Do not steal.
Do not eat flesh torn from a living animal.
Establish courts of justice to uphold law and ensure societal order.

God’s covenant with Noah contains only a small set of basic commands.  

1. Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth.
2. But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.
3. From his fellow man I will require a reckoning for the life of man.

And God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth. The fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth and upon every bird of the heavens, upon everything that creeps on the ground and all the fish of the sea. Into your hand they are delivered. Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. And as I gave you the green plants, I give you everything. But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood. And for your lifeblood I will require a reckoning: from every beast I will require it and from man. From his fellow man I will require a reckoning for the life of man. “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in his own image. (Genesis 9:1-7).

The Talmudic Noahide code introduces additional requirements beyond the divine mandate. In this respect, the rabbinic expansion constitutes an unauthorized addition to God’s word. You shall not add to the word that I command you, nor take from it, that you may keep the commandments of the LORD your God that I command you. (Deuteronomy 4:2; Proverbs 30:6).

The Talmud is the foundational text of Rabbinic Judaism, a comprehensive collection of Jewish law, ethics, philosophy, and commentary on the Torah. It consists of the Mishnah (a compilation of oral laws) and the Gemara (commentaries and discussions on the Mishnah) and preserves centuries of rabbinic teachings, debates, and interpretations on subjects ranging from legal practice and ethical reasoning to custom, history, and folklore. Within Judaism the Talmud  is regarded as second in authority only to the Hebrew Bible (Tanakh). It is important to note that the Talmud is not divine revelation but a human record of rabbinic thought. In this respect the Talmud stands in direct contrast to Christian orthodoxy, which maintains that scripture alone is the exclusive source of truth and authority.

In Matthew 23, Jesus delivered sustained criticism against the scribes and Pharisees, condemning their conduct and teaching. These groups developed in the second century BC, after the destruction of the First Temple. The Pharisees upheld the oral tradition, while the Sadducees—largely a priestly class—rejected the oral law and denied the resurrection. The Sanhedrin drew members from these factions. According to New Testament accounts, leaders from both groups strenuously opposed Jesus and were involved in the actions that led to his death. 

Talmudic Judaism is incompatible with Christianity. Jewish rabbis have historically opposed the Christian claim to revealed truth and continue to advance teachings that exclude Jesus Christ, grounding their authority instead in their own inherited traditions. The New Testament issues repeated condemnations and warnings concerning Pharisaic tradition.

Therefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith, not devoting themselves to Jewish myths and the commands of people who turn away from the truth. (Titus 1:13-14).

They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people’s shoulders.. (Matthew 23:4).

But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut the kingdom of heaven in people’s faces. (Matthew 23:13).

You leave the commandment of God and hold to the tradition of men. (Mark 7:8).

..thus making void the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down. And many such things you do.” (Mark 7:13).

Because the Noahide laws are rooted in Talmudic tradition, they conflict directly with Christian doctrine and operate as a structural counter‑statement to the gospel. The Sanhedrin’s original denial of Jesus’ messianic identity is maintained as its continuing theological position. The New Testament specifically warns that whoever denies the Son does not have the Father. (John 3:36; Matthew 10:33; John 5:23; 1 John 2:23,4:15 etc.) Rabbi Tovia Singer describes Noahide identity as a de facto conversion to Judaism, which by definition excludes Christian faith. Singer instructs Noahides to reject Jesus Christ and states that they are not permitted to enter a Christian church.4 He also instructs Noahides to put themselves under the direct authority of the rabbis.5  

Then Jesus said to the crowds and to his disciples, “The scribes and the Pharisees sit on Moses’ seat, so do and observe whatever they tell you, but not the works they do. For they preach, but do not practice. They tie up heavy burdens, hard to bear, and lay them on people’s shoulders, but they themselves are not willing to move them with their finger. They do all their deeds to be seen by others. For they make their phylacteries broad and their fringes long, and they love the place of honor at feasts and the best seats in the synagogues 7and greetings in the marketplaces and being called rabbi by others. But you are not to be called rabbi, for you have one teacher, and you are all brothers. And call no man your father on earth, for you have one Father, who is in heaven. Neither be called instructors, for you have one instructor, the Christ. The greatest among you shall be your servant. Whoever exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted. (Matthew 23:1-12).

The contemporary Sanhedrin anticipates a future “Messiah” who will inaugurate a Golden Age, a period of Jewish supremacy where non Jews are subordinated to Jewish rule under Noahide laws. The Noahide Golden Age is treated as a future reality expressed through modern institutional behavior. The United States has formally recognized the Seven Noahide Laws as ethical norms deemed essential for maintaining societal stability. According to Israel National News: "Donald Trump has been the greatest supporter of Noahide law in US history."6 

The concern is straightforward: Christians should avoid submitting to any system that contradicts the gospel. Even so, I reject interpretations portraying the Noahide laws as a future program of beheading Christians. Currently, they lack institutional form, political viability, and theological grounding for any global enforcement. It is not implausible that the Noahide Laws will grow in influence, but in my view they will not become a universal religious system endowed with the extensive powers asserted by some.  

The overlooked weakness in these arguments is that the Jews will not worship the Antichrist. The beheadings referenced in Revelation are portrayed as executions carried out under the Antichrist’s regime, specifically targeting those who refuse his authority and remain faithful to Christ. (Revelation 20:4). At the midpoint of the seventieth week—the abomination of desolation—the Antichrist will break his covenant with Israel, and his forces will surround Jerusalem, initiating “the time of Jacob’s trouble”. (Jeremiah 30:7 cf. Matthew 24:21). The prophets are consistent: Ezekiel 20:34–38 depicts Israel brought under divine discipline before restoration; Zechariah 13:8–9 foresees two‑thirds cut off while a remnant is refined; Daniel 9:24 assigns seventy weeks for Israel to complete its transgression. This future distress aligns with Revelation 6–18, where Israel undergoes unprecedented tribulation. Its purpose is corrective rather than annihilative—discipline that turns the nation back to her Messiah. (Zechariah 12:10; Hosea 5:15). 

And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator. (Daniel 9:27 cf. Matthew 24:15). But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. (Luke 21:20). 

Premillennial interpreters understand the Roman encirclement of Jerusalem in 70 AD as a typological precursor to the eschatological offensive attributed to the Antichrist and his forces. The historical siege operates as the “near fulfillment",  establishing the antecedent that is then projected forward into a final crisis. In this framework, the 70 AD destruction serves as the prototype for a later, intensified assault during the great tribulation. 

When the Antichrist is revealed at the mid point of the 70th week, the Noahide Laws are unlikely to remain operative. The Antichrist is portrayed as a figure who functions as a law unto himself, rejecting established authority. He is explicitly designated “the man of lawlessness” in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 9. This pattern aligns with the biblical use of “a law unto themselves” in Romans 2:14 to describe those who do not adhere to an external standard. He is further portrayed as exalting himself above God’s law and asserting his own definitions of right and wrong, in direct opposition to divine authority. 

He will show no regard for the gods of his fathers, nor for the one desired by women, nor for any other god, because he will magnify himself above them all. And in their place, he will honor a god of fortresses—a god his fathers did not know—with gold, silver, precious stones, and riches. He will attack the strongest fortresses with the help of a foreign god and will greatly honor those who acknowledge him, making them rulers over many and distributing the land for a price. (Daniel 11:37-39).

Then the beast was permitted to wage war against the saints and to conquer them, and it was given authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation. And all who dwell on the earth will worship the beast—all whose names have not been written from the foundation of the world in the Book of Life belonging to the Lamb who was slain. (Revelation 13:7-8).

And the second beast required all people, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their forehead, so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark—the name of the beast or the number of its name. (Revelation 13:16-17).

We should be concerned about the Noahide Laws, and believers in Jesus Christ should not commit to them. It is anticipated that Satan will tolerate the Noahide Laws and the temple sacrifices only while it suits his purposes. After three and a half years he will break his covenant with Israel and this will initiate the time of Jacob's trouble. (Jeremiah 30:7; Romans 11:26).

And when the dragon saw that he had been thrown to the earth, he pursued the woman (Israel) who had given birth to the male child. But the woman was given two wings of a great eagle to fly from the presence of the serpent to her place in the wilderness, where she was nourished for a time, and times, and half a time. Then from his mouth the serpent spewed water like a river to overtake the woman and sweep her away in the torrent. But the earth helped the woman and opened its mouth to swallow up the river that the dragon had poured from his mouth. And the dragon was enraged at the woman and went to make war with the rest of her children, who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus. And the dragon stood on the shore of the sea. (Revelation 12:13-17).

Are the Jews still "God's chosen people"? Incredibly yes. The concept of the remnant of Israel signifies that while many may reject God, a faithful remnant will ultimately be saved, fulfilling God's covenant promises.

..I do not want you to be unaware of this mystery, brothers: a partial hardening has come upon Israel, until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in. And in this way all Israel will be saved, as it is written,
“The Deliverer will come from Zion, he will banish ungodliness from Jacob”; “and this will be my covenant with them when I take away their sins.” As regards the gospel, they are enemies for your sake. But as regards election, they are beloved for the sake of their forefathers. For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable. For just as you were at one time disobedient to God but now have received mercy because of their disobedience, so they too have now been disobedient in order that by the mercy shown to you they also may now receive mercy. For God has consigned all to disobedience, that he may have mercy on all. (Romans 11:25-32 cf. Isaiah 10:22-23, 27:9, 59:20-21).

While the Noahide Laws do not present an immediate threat, they represent a developing eschatological scenario that warrants careful, ongoing observation.

1. First International Congress of Noahides Set for Jerusalem This November - Israel365 News
2. Seven Laws for a Beautiful Planet - The Noahide Tradition - Chabad.org
3. Chabad.org
4. MAY A NOAHIDE ENTER A CHURCH?
5. Rabbi Tovia Singer shares everything you need to know about Noachide and it will excite you!

6. Donald J. Trump: Champion of Noahide Law | Israel National News 

Chapter 1: Noahide Laws: Are Christians Focusing on the Wrong Issue? - UK Apologetics Library

ADAM FANNIN: PASTORS AGAINST NOAHIDE CONGRESS

Pastors Against Noahide Congress

I agree with Adam Fannin that the Noahide Laws are Talmudic rather than biblical. Rabbi Tovia Singer describes Noahide identity as a de facto conversion to Judaism, which by definition excludes Christian faith. By his account Noahides reject Jesus Christ and are not permitted to enter a Christian church.1  

The Noahide Laws are spreading as a voluntary religious‑ethical movement, not as binding global legislation. Modern Noahidism is expanding—there are organized communities across multiple continents, from the US and UK to Latin America, Africa, and Asia. These groups adopt the Seven Laws voluntarily as a moral‑religious identity. Fannin and similar commentators claim that the Noahide Laws will gain global traction, forming a one‑world religious system with enforced compliance, ultimately empowered under the Antichrist to execute dissenters.

Fannin’s antisemitic bias is evident in this video, but his conclusions regarding the Noahide Laws are weak and lack support from biblical texts.

Fannin asserts that the Antichrist must be Jewish, but this rests on assumption rather than textual evidence. Scripture does not assign the Antichrist any ethnicity. The Bible provides multiple non‑Jewish “types” of the Antichrist—Roman, Greek‑Seleucid, Egyptian, Philistine, Phoenician, Babylonian. None of these establish the ethnicity of the final figure.

The common inference is that the Antichrist will arise from a revived Roman empire, since the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD was carried out by Roman forces. And after the sixty-two weeks, an anointed one shall be cut off and shall have nothing. And the people of the prince who is to come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end shall come with a flood, and to the end there shall be war. Desolations are decreed. (Daniel 9:26).

Fannin: "You have to worship the Antichrist to take his mark. And if you don't, the world court, the Noahide world court will possibly take off your head as we just read in Revelation chapter 20".

The overlooked weakness in these arguments is that the Jews will not worship the Antichrist. Fannin's persistent claim that scripture offers no future for Israel is unsupported. At the midpoint of the seventieth week—the abomination of desolation—the Antichrist will break his covenant with Israel, and his forces will surround Jerusalem, initiating “the time of Jacob’s trouble”. (Jeremiah 30:7 cf. Matthew 24:21). The prophets are consistent: Ezekiel 20:34–38 depicts Israel brought under divine discipline before restoration; Zechariah 13:8–9 foresees two‑thirds cut off while a remnant is refined; Daniel 9:24 assigns seventy weeks for Israel to complete its transgression. This future distress aligns with Revelation 6–18, where Israel undergoes unprecedented tribulation. Its purpose is corrective rather than annihilative—discipline that turns the nation back to her Messiah. (Zechariah 12:10; Hosea 5:15). 

And he shall make a strong covenant with many for one week, and for half of the week he shall put an end to sacrifice and offering. And on the wing of abominations shall come one who makes desolate, until the decreed end is poured out on the desolator. (Daniel 9:27 cf. Matthew 24:15). But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. (Luke 21:20). 

Premillennial interpreters understand the Roman encirclement of Jerusalem in 70 AD as a typological precursor to the eschatological offensive attributed to the Antichrist and his forces. The historical siege operates as the “near fulfillment",  establishing the antecedent that is then projected forward into a final crisis. In this framework, the 70 AD destruction serves as the prototype for a later, intensified assault during the great tribulation. 

The beheadings referenced in Revelation are portrayed as executions carried out under the Antichrist’s regime, specifically targeting those who refuse his authority and remain faithful to Christ. (Revelation 20:4). When the Antichrist is revealed at the mid point of the 70th week, the Noahide Laws are unlikely to remain operative. The Antichrist is portrayed as a figure who functions as a law unto himself, rejecting established authority. He is explicitly designated “the man of lawlessness” in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, 9. This pattern aligns with the biblical use of “a law unto themselves” in Romans 2:14 to describe those who do not adhere to an external standard. He is further portrayed as exalting himself above God’s law and asserting his own definitions of right and wrong, in direct opposition to divine authority. 

He will show no regard for the gods of his fathers, nor for the one desired by women, nor for any other god, because he will magnify himself above them all. And in their place, he will honor a god of fortresses—a god his fathers did not know—with gold, silver, precious stones, and riches. He will attack the strongest fortresses with the help of a foreign god and will greatly honor those who acknowledge him, making them rulers over many and distributing the land for a price. (Daniel 11:37-39).

Then the beast was permitted to wage war against the saints and to conquer them, and it was given authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation. And all who dwell on the earth will worship the beast—all whose names have not been written from the foundation of the world in the Book of Life belonging to the Lamb who was slain. (Revelation 13:7-8).

And the second beast required all people, small and great, rich and poor, free and slave, to receive a mark on their right hand or on their forehead, so that no one could buy or sell unless he had the mark—the name of the beast or the number of its name. (Revelation 13:16-17).

We should be concerned about the Noahide Laws, and believers in Jesus Christ should not commit to them. In my view, Satan will tolerate the Noahide Laws and the temple sacrifices only while it suits his purposes. After three and a half years he will break his covenant with Israel and this will initiate the time of Jacob's trouble. (Jeremiah 30:7; Romans 11:26).

And when the dragon saw that he had been thrown to the earth, he pursued the woman (Israel) who had given birth to the male child. But the woman was given two wings of a great eagle to fly from the presence of the serpent to her place in the wilderness, where she was nourished for a time, and times, and half a time. Then from his mouth the serpent spewed water like a river to overtake the woman and sweep her away in the torrent. But the earth helped the woman and opened its mouth to swallow up the river that the dragon had poured from his mouth. And the dragon was enraged at the woman and went to make war with the rest of her children, who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus. And the dragon stood on the shore of the sea. (Revelation 12:13-17).

1. MAY A NOAHIDE ENTER A CHURCH?   

PETER GOEMON: PRETRIB RAPTURE

20 Questions that Expose Dispensationalism?

The Bible Sojourner: "Do these twenty questions expose fatal problems with dispensationalism? Critics argue that dispensational theology cannot adequately explain key Bible passages concerning Israel and the church, the kingdom of God, Daniel’s seventieth week, the pretribulation rapture, biblical prophecy, and the New Covenant. In this episode, Peter Goeman works rapidly through twenty common objections to dispensationalism and asks whether they genuinely overturn the system.
Along the way, he examines covenant theology, the interpretation of Old Testament prophecy, the “last trumpet,” the timing of the rapture, the future of Israel, and the relationship between the church and the New Covenant. Some questions raise legitimate issues, while others depend upon misunderstandings or outdated caricatures. Ultimately, the question is not whether the label “dispensationalism” can survive criticism, but whether its central beliefs accurately reflect what Scripture teaches."

I share some core tenets associated with dispensationalism—including a literal prophetic hermeneutic, premillennialism, and a firm Israel–Church distinction. However, apart from my general reluctance to adopt theological labels, the pretribulation rapture remains a defining feature of dispensationalism that many Christians find deeply problematic.

In this post I will take issue with Goeman's denial of the John Nelson Darby connection with the pretrib rapture. 

2: 1. Did Anyone Believe Dispensationalism Before Darby (3:25 mark)

Goeman: "The first question on the list: If your system is truly biblical, why did no one see it until John Nelson Darby in the 1830s? ..this is a very common assumption that people make. They assume that Nelson, John Nelson Darby creates a system, creates theological beliefs. One of the things I often challenge people is, I will often ask them, name one thing that John Nelson Darby invented. Because that's really the reality that we're talking about here is did John Nelson Darby invent anything? And there have been quite a few recent studies in fact about the life of John Nelson Darby that pretty much show that he is not contributing as much uniquely if anything as what is often assumed for people. In fact, the pretribulational rapture, which a lot of people assume Darby is the one who invented or maybe he got it from Margaret McDonald, that's a, you know, fallacy that many people have have held to. Even well-known individuals have propagated that belief. But it has been well established that John Nelson Darby did not create that himself. He didn't receive it from somebody else or he didn't receive it from Margaret McDonald in some charismatic vision or anything like that. He actually was influenced by a man named Thomas Tweedy.."  

Little is known about Thomas Tweedy and I have not heard anyone else mention him in this connection. Some sketchy details are found on the Plymouth Brethren Archive:

 
"The last of the early Brethren to come to Demerara was Thomas Tweedy who had seceded from the Church of lreland in the early 1830s soon after his graduation from Trinity College, Dublin, in 1833. As a roving evangelist in Ireland he had decided that missionary work was his vocation, but partly on account of ill health and perhaps also because of discouragement from his family he remained in Ireland for some years. It was only in 1842 that he set out for Demerara where he arrived after 'a fine passage' of only 33 days. How effective was Tweedy's work as a missionary is hard to say, as his health was, at the best of times, fragile and the only account we have of his life is written by one who was not particularly interested in the spiritual side of his work. He married a local coloured lady, Elizabeth Thomas by whom he had two children. Henry died when still young, while Elizabeth became the caretaker of the chapel in Georgetown."1  

Max S Weremchuk: "William Kelly refers to Newton telling him that Darby had written a letter to him in which he mentioned Thomas Tweedy suggesting 2 Thess. 2:1-2 as a help in understanding the rapture (in the article 'The Rapture of the Saints: who suggested it, or rather on What Scripture?'). In 'B. W. Newton and Dr. S. P. Tregelles. Teachers of the Faith and the Future' edited by G. H. Fromow p. 41 we read: 'About the year 1833, an Anglican Missionary came from London to Dublin, and was admitted into this circle. He told them that, while the first fourteen verses of that chapter (Matt. 24) were Christian, the remaining portion was 'Jewish,' and that, although Jewish believers might be guided by that Scripture, after the Church had been taken up to meet the Lord, it had nothing to do with the Church in the present age. Said he, 'We have found the key never discovered before.'
Could this have been Tweedy?
Would this not have been the 'clue' Darby still needed to come to the conclusion of the 'Jewish interpretation'? I would not be surprised if Darby at sometime thought of a partial rapture -- as appears in Margaret MacDonald. Could this be what the 'secret rapture' meant? The help Darby received from Tweedy and thus resulting in his 'Jewish interpretation' led to the now well-known 'Brethren' view of the rapture."2

Goeman challenges his audience to identify a doctrine unknown before Darby. The pretribulation rapture does not appear in the historical record prior to the 1830–1833 period, when Darby began articulating and promoting it. Despite extensive searches — no verifiable evidence places the pretrib rapture before that period. Documented instances of misrepresentation by pretrib leaders have been noted by Dave MacPherson, myself, and other researchers. Pretribulational eisegesis remains widespread, and the conduct of certain advocates raises legitimate concerns. The pattern indicates a coordinated effort to generate artificial evidence with certain leaders apparently willing to employ unscrupulous methods to preserve the claim.

Examples

* Lee Brainard's unscrupulous research into the early Church Fathers. Lee Brainard's amateurish attempts to reinterpret the writings of various church fathers have been debunked in every instance.3 
* Mark Hitchcock's recent claim that he has discovered "new evidence" of the pretrib rapture in Irenaeus is a regurgitation of old false claims.4 
* Andy Woods credibility issues. Alan Kurschner's strong rebuttal against Andy Woods' "lies" and "evasion of significant arguments" in 2018.5 

* Paul Wilkinson's blatant revisionism of John Nelson Darby.6

* The Dave MacPherson Rapture Files Blogger: Posts 

A recent exchange between Andy Woods and Paul Wilkinson made clear that both treat the pretrib rapture as a primary issue, with Woods stating that he avoids association with individuals and ministries that reject it.

Woods: "My question for you is, is this a secondary issue, because a lot of people say 'don't get wrapped up in this, this is a secondary issue'?
Wilkinson: "Is it a secondary issue? Well, the apostle Paul in Titus 2 said it's our blessed hope.. that's my hope, that's the church's hope..
Woods: "What I am hearing you say is that this is not a secondary issue because what you believe about this changes your focus.. I don't think it is a secondary issue either and I mark and avoid people. I have a hard time appearing on their shows, appearing at their conferences.. A lot of them have contacted me and wanted to participate at our conferences and when I find out they are aggressively promoting some other perspective, I just have a difficult time unleashing them in front of God's people.."7  

For an ordinary attendee of Sugar Land Bible Church who raises doubts, Woods’ highly assertive almost cultish boundary‑drawing rhetoric would no doubt be difficult to withstand. These are scary people!

Darby's claim of direct revelation 

Paul Wilkinson, who claims to be an expert on John Nelson Darby asks: "Where did his (Darby's) understanding of the rapture come from? It didn't come immediately, but as he himself writes, in his own writings, he got it from studying the word.."7  

Actually Darby claimed (falsely in my view) that God Himself revealed dispensational hermeneutics to him directly. 

Darby - in his own words.. "..what God has with infinite graciousness revealed to me concerning His dealing with the Church.."8  

"..it was in this the Lord was pleased, without man's teaching, first to open my eyes on this subject, that I might learn His will concerning it throughout."9 

Darby’s claim to have received the pretribulation rapture by direct revelation places the entire doctrine on unstable ground. By presenting his insight as newly revealed truth—functionally parallel to the way first‑century apostles received revelation (Galatians 1:12; cf. 1 Corinthians 11:23)—he positioned himself as a post‑apostolic recipient of fresh divine disclosure. After nineteen centuries of Christian history, that claim is highly questionable.

John Rylands University Library: "He (Darby) produced popular synopses of the Bible and voluminous polemical writings on biblical subjects. As well as his distinctive eschatological views in which he popularised the idea of the 'rapture' of true believers at the point of Christ's return, he developed a dispensational interpretation of the Bible. This analysed the relationship between God and mankind in terms of distinct dispensations or epochs, with marked changes and transformations occurring following pivotal events. This interpretation proved to be a useful way of overcoming contradictions and discrepancies within the Bible. It was adopted and developed further in the early twentieth century by C.S. Scofield who produced a highly popular and influential series of reference and study Bibles. Through this medium, Darby became one of the most influential forces shaping the character and form of modern day American fundamentalist Christianity. Most of those describing themselves a 'premillenial dispensationalists' can trace the modern roots of their ideas to Darby.10

In my assessment, the pretribulation rapture is one of the most dangerous deceptions to gain traction in the modern church. Its advocates have worked extensively to force the doctrine into the biblical text, and they have made equally strenuous attempts to demonstrate that pretribulationism predates Darby. Both efforts have been unsuccessful. Believers should soberly consider the implications before relying on a hope that will not materialize when the Antichrist’s persecution becomes a concrete reality.

There are significant gaps in Goemon’s argument—gaps that someone with his background should not have overlooked. I have supplied exactly what he requested: evidence of a doctrinal position that did not exist prior Darby. A response from him and definitive proof that the pretrib rapture was taught prior to the 1830s would be appreciated. 

* Peter Goeman responded to me on 29/07/26. He recommends that I consult Discovering Dispensationalism by Fazio and Marsh and Dispensationalism Before Darby by William Watson. I do not intend to purchase these volumes, but I have located an article by Watson on the Pre-trib Research Center website.11  The passages Watson cites are written in archaic English and are not straightforward to interpret. I have examined these closely, and while they affirm premillennialism, none of them provides evidence of the pretrib rapture. I have added two examples below for examination. 

Watson:" Using a classic Pre-Tribulation argument, Homes wondered why the saints would be raptured into the aire, instead of meeting Christ when he arrives on earth: 

Nathaniel Homes: "What may be conceived to be the cause of this rapture of the Saints on high to meet the Lord in the clouds, rather then to wait his coming to the earth. What if it bee, that they may be preserved during the conflagration of the earth, and the works thereof, 2 Pet.3.10. That as Noah, and his family were preserved from the deluge, by being lift up above the waters in the Ark, so should the Saints at the conflagration bee lift up in the clouds unto their Ark, Christ, to be preserved there from the Deluge of fire, wherein the wicked shall be consumed?33"

Note that Homes uses the word "conflagration" in connection with 2 Peter 3:10 which refers to "the day of the Lord".

Watson: "The most cited so-called proponent of a pre-Tribulation rapture in the seventeenth century is French Huguenot Pierre Jurieu. Numerous recent authors claim, that he believed 'Christ would come in the air to rapture the saints and return to heaven before the battle of Armageddon. He spoke of a secret rapture prior to His coming in glory and judgment at Armageddon.'120  Having scoured all of Jurieu’s work, I have only encountered one passage that may fit, part 2 chapter 24 of his Accomplishment of the Scripture Prophecies, or the Approaching Deliverance of the Church:

Jurieu: "I would not be too confident, that this ought to be understood of a visible descent and abode of Christ on Earth; yea, I do not believe it probable. But to me it seems very Evident, that this Reign shall begin with some miraculous appearance of our Lord in his Glory. After which he shall go back to Heaven, and from thence govern this victorious Church. Mr. I. Mede, and others after him, would make this reign of Christ for a thousand years, to be the Day of Iudgement, and that within this time shall be the Resurrection of the dead. Others say, that the Resurrection, and last Iudgement, shall be before this Reign of Christ; but I dare not determine that.121"

 

Watson quotes a number of other sources, but as far as I can ascertain none of them refer to a pretrib rapture.

If definitive pretribulation rapture texts exist prior to 1830, proponents would be shouting them from the rooftops. Their inability to produce such evidence leaves them in the dubious position of making false claims and in some cases manufacturing support.

1. Thomas Tweedy | Plymouth Brethren Archive
2. My Brethren - Biography - J. N. Darby - Research 1
3. WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING: FALSE PROPHETS AND BIBLE TEACHERS IN THE LAST DAYS: Lee Brainard
4. Pre-Trib Proof! | Tipping Point with Jimmy Evans
5. What Andy Woods Is Not Telling You about 'the Apostasy' in 2 Thess 2:3 - Ep. 121 | ESCHATOS MINISTRIES
6. WOLVES IN SHEEP'S CLOTHING: FALSE PROPHETS AND BIBLE TEACHERS IN THE LAST DAYS: Paul Wilkinson
7. PPOV 346. Drs. Paul Wilkinson & Andy Woods discuss Christian Palestinianism. 3-21-25.
8. Reflections Upon The Prophetic Inquiry And The Views Advanced In It | Plymouth Brethren Writings
9. Evidence From Scripture of the Passing Away of the Present Dispensation - John Nelson Darby (#62234) - BTP
10. Papers of John Nelson Darby
11. William Watson

7 Pretrib Problems and the Prewrath Rapture (Full Movie)
Prewrath - Early Church Fathers