Search This Blog

Tuesday, 17 January 2017

Dispensationalism: Occult Roots.. from Liberty to the Captives

The links below give explicit examples of John Nelson Darby's occult roots in Theosophy, and the critical similarities between his writings and those of Satanist Helena Blavatsky.

 Dispensationalism: Occult Roots
In this series the term "Dispensationalism" refers to the theological system invented in the 1830's by Plymouth Brethren founder, John Nelson Darby (Nov. 18, 1800 — April 29, 1882). While there may be controversy over whether he was the first person to conceive of the pre-tribulation rapture and two distinct peoples of God doctrines, it is certain he played a huge role in systematizing and promoting dispensational theology. His doctrines are found in C. I. Scofield's Old Scofield Study Bible—copyright 1909 and 1917 and are the foundation for other dispensational works.
This series of charts and articles is published to make you aware that J.N. Darby marked his bible translation, The Holy Scriptures: A New Translation from the Original Languages by J. N. Darby, and his theological writings with Theosophical/occult vocabulary and doctrines.
John Darby's Christ Compared to Alice Bailey's Theosophical Christ
John Nelson Darby Waited For "the Coming One"
John Darby's Pre-Tribulation Rapture Alterations to the Bible (John Darby inserted the message of imminence into many prophetic verses of scripture.)

John Nelson Darby's Version: Based on Corrupt Texts (John Darby was a Forerunner of the Modern Bible Versions Movement.)
John Darby Version: Doctrinal Changes to the Bible (In view of John Darby's departure from historic Christian beliefs, let us examine his bible.)
Occult/New Age markings on the John Darby Version
Scofield Study Bibles Marked With Masonic Symbolism

Theosophists Look for the "Consummation of the Age" 
Darby/Scofield's"coming in flesh" Christ is Antichrist
J.N. Darby's Doctrinal Changes to Second Thessalonians Chapter 2

J.N. Darby's and Scofield's "Habitable Earth/World" Doctrine

John Darby Version Removed "Damned" and "Damnation"  (Cyrus Scofield (via his marginal notes) replaced "damnation" with words found in the critical Greek Text--such as judgment.  (J.N. Darby and Cyrus Scofield replaced hell (place of fire and torment) with "hades" which means the place of the dead.)

John Darby Version Replaced "World" with "Age"                          

George Müeller Chose His Bible Over Darby's Doctrines
Also see the related section about another prominent Plymouth Brethren leader, Thomas Newberry: George Ricker Berry English Interlinear: Corrupt
For further study see EXTERNAL LINKS BELOW:
Scofield's use of the Critical Text and the AV
Analyzing Scofield
Proviso: The material from "Liberty to the Captives" concerning Dispensationalism is very useful. However I hold the pre-millennial view.. that is to say that I do not concur with preterism. A useful discussion, and an excerpt from BW Newton on this subject can be read on the comments to this post below.


colin said...

Dispensationalism is thoroughly unbiblical, it separates the Church of Christ into two distinct people modes of salvation; OT believers are saved by keeping the law, NT believers by grace.

The law was only ever a "schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ" Galatians 3.24-25. The Bible unequivocally teaches that the combined OT and NT Church is His bride and His body. The Old Testament Church; the vast majority whom were Jews, and the New Testament Church; the vast majority whom are Gentiles. Did the apostle Paul think he was separated from his OT brethren? Not for one minute, Romans 9.3-4!

This pre-tribulation (any-moment) rapture that is not taught anywhere in Scripture, you might say is going right down to the wire! So when it does eventually happen, it WILL be indistinguishable from the Second Advent (for they are the one and the SAME event).

As for the minutiae of what happens in the interim period up until the grand apocalyptic climax, God only knows.
It is my opinion that many who are led astray by pre-tribulationism could end up worshipping the Antichrist, for they don't believe they will be around to see him?
I believe that there is a consequence to following false teachers/doctrines, could it ever be otherwise?

God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

Dispensationalism is definitely unbiblical Colin. What I didn't realise prior to reading this recently is where Darby actually got it from! Clearly anything from Blavatsky and Theosophy has come directly from demons.. and there will be dire consequences. I believe that many will "fall away" and worship the Antichrist... and all due to the arrogance of Darby and todays false teachers! All those teachers who promote pre-trib like Thomas Ice etc. are misleading the Body of Christ!
I personally believe the pre-wrath view - it makes the most sense to me, but I am not dogmatic about it. Joe Schimmel is post trib and even post wrath. Like you, he believes that it will go right down to the wire. He teaches it, but I haven't quite grasped his view... at least not at the moment. Joe Schimmel is so very graceful, he does not aggressively push the post-trib view and I am always blessed when I hear him. Like Joe, I do feel very strongly that the rapture is is definitely NOT pre-trib... it is a doctrine of demons I am totally convinced.
God bless

colin said...

Forgot to say, some interesting links there, but a LOT of reading! Or rather studying!

What do you make of James Whisler's piece about Daniel 9.27? I have always struggled with that verse, it can be read both ways, I believe. Many good reformed historical post-trib pre-millennial teachers such as B.W.Newton disagreed with Matthew Henry on this. Henry wasn't pre-millennial.

I must read it again. If pre-trib isn't taught in Scripture, then yes, I would HAVE to agree that it is a "doctrine of demons", what else can it be? But, again, my beef is with the 'teachers',James 3.1?

God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

I shall have to give James Whisler's peice some serious thought Colin. The tribulation is 3.5 years and not 7 years as various teachers keep insisting.
I will get back to you on this.
James 3:1 is relevant of course - false teachers will be held responsible as in James 3:1. I was thinking along the lines that we wrestle not against flesh and blood also. (Ephesians 6:12).
I have learned a lot from these pages of "Liberty to the Captives" website - it has been very informative. I will have to go through their other material.
God bless.

colin said...

From what I can glean, spending a few minutes on their site tonight, "Liberty to the Captives" are NOT pre-millennial (big problem!!?), but, nevertheless, I most CERTAINLY agree with their stand against the any moment, false pre-tribulation rapture teaching; period!
Of course, we KNOW that the Bible is explicit on a 3.5 year tribulation, that is NOT up for debate. Daniel 9.27, however, can be interpreted in more than one way. If Matthew Henry's/Whisler's interpretation be the correct one, then there can be NO Antichrist 'peace treaty'. But, I must study this further.

Yes, "we wrestle not against flesh and blood", we are at war with Satan; his demons, the fallen angels are (all? I believe so!) currently in the abyss, to be let loose as per the Revelation, shortly before the soon coming millennium. Ephesians 6.12 speaks of "high places", but this can also mean high places in our earthly sphere, that is in kingdoms, governments, Davos, EU, etc.

Much, however has been made of this 'peace treaty', but let us cast all pre-conceived notions, prejudices aside?

A work in progress.

God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

It is a big problem that they are not pre-millenial Colin I enitirely agree... need more time to look into them. God bless.

colin said...

Sometimes we get these 'blind-spots'!

if Matthew Henry's/Whisler's understanding about the "covenant" in Daniel 9.27 be correct, it would make the entirety of Matthew 24 to be fulfilled! Absolutely cannot be!!! It would mean all those signs etc happened some 2000 years ago!
I was trying to shoehorn Henry's theory of the covenant in (it sounds so plausible), but came across manifold difficulties.
Therefore the covenant (peace treaty?) MUST be Antichrist's!

We agree with much that Dispensationalists teach, but NOT everything! Most notably NOT the pre-trib rapture!
God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

You are right Colin.. I have not had a chance to study Whisler's theory in any detail yet. I am giving priority to reading your excellent material on the flat earth.
God bless

Treena Gisborn said...

Daniel 9
V26 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. V27 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.”

v26: an anointed one shall be cut off...refers to Jesus Christ.
..the people of the prince to come.. refers to the destruction of the temple in 70AD
v27 And he.. My understanding is that "he" refers to “the prince to come” as in the previous verse.v26
I can only really understand this as the Antichrist who will make a strong covenant with many for one week i.e. 7 years which he will break after 3.5 years.
As I have written in my posts against the intra-seal rapture by Jacob Prasch, no seven year tribulation can be found in the scriptures. The great tribulation lasts for 3.5 years, from the time the covenant is broken by the Antichrist.

As you say Colin, Matthew 24 has not been fulfilled. Jesus is speaking of the end of the age, not just about the destruction of the temple in 70 AD.

This is how I see it anyway.
God bless

colin said...

I heartily concur with what you have just written.

"Liberty to the captives" website may well contain much useful information regarding the source of J.N.Darby's errant theology, but, rather than dwell on extra biblical material, is it not best to reject his theology from the pages of Scripture, alone?

I have just e-mailed to you an excellent (in my opinion, anyway!) extract from B.W.Newton's outstanding work; "The Prophecy of The Lord Jesus" obtainable from S.G.A.T. (Sovereign Grace Advent Testimony) London. It is well worth putting it on your blog.

He CLEARLY explains how the rise of false prophets came to be; especially the multitude of them since his time of writing back some 150 years ago!

God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

As you say, we need to refute false doctrines with the Word of God rather than extra biblical material. "Liberty to the Captives" has been useful for me personally, but there is some error to contend with at the same time. Thank you so much for emailing the extract from BW Newton. I know that Newton was sound - I will read it tomorrow. God bless.

Treena Gisborn said...

Excerpt from BW Newton 1807-1899.

The prophecy of the Lord Jesus Christ. Matthew 24.

THE SECOND DIVISION of this prophecy commences with the fifteenth verse, and extends to the close of the twenty-eighth verse. As this part of the chapter has been commonly regarded as fulfilled, it will be necessary first to show that the events in it are NOT accomplished, but future.
The verse which claims our attention is that which speaks of the unequalled season of tribulation. The words are very remarkable. “Then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.”
Is then the season of tribulation, thus solemnly predicted, past, or is it yet to come? This question is readily answered. One distinctive mark of THE unequalled season of tribulation is, that immediately after it the Lord will appear in glory: “IMMEDIATELY after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light…And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven; and then shall all the tribes of the Land mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory,” etc. The corresponding words in Mark are not less express: “But IN THOSE DAYS, after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened,” etc. Now if, as has been commonly said, the unequalled season of tribulation is past, if it occurred 1800 years ago, when Jerusalem was captured by the Romans, then we must say that “IMMEDIATELY AFTER” it, and “IN THOSE DAYS,” the sun and moon were darkened, and that the Lord returned in glory, and that He sent His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and gathered together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to another. But was it so? Infidels have seen the impossibility of our truthfully saying this; and assuming that the predicted tribulation is past, have argued that the Lord Jesus must have been a false prophet; for that He said He would come in glory IMMEDIATELY after the capture of Jerusalem, and He did not come. They say (and they say rightly) that the word immediately (euthus) is emphatic. Indeed it is the emphatic word of the chapter. The disciples had asked, What shall be the sign of Thy coming? The Lord answers, that the unequalled season of tribulation is THE sign: for that IMMEDIATELY after it He will appear. And so it shall be. His words shall be strictly, and in all minuteness, fulfilled. There will be the unequalled tribulation of which He spake, and immediately after it He will come in His glory.
But although this argument is of itself conclusive, another can be added not less decisive. The words which our Lord uses in referring to the unequalled season of tribulation are virtually a quotation from the prophet Daniel. Daniel speaks of “a time of trouble such as never was since there was a nation, even to that same time.” Now, inasmuch as there cannot be two unequalled seasons of tribulation, it follows that the passage in Daniel, and that in Matthew, must refer to the same event; and therefore, if the passage in Daniel be unfulfilled, the passage in Matthew must also be unfulfilled.
The futurity of the passage in Daniel may be regarded as an admitted truth. How, indeed, can its futurity be questioned? Only by our becoming infidels and rejecting the inspiration of the book of Daniel, and with it rejecting Christ, who quoted and affirmed the truth of Daniel’s prophecy. To reject Daniel is to reject Christ.

Treena Gisborn said...

Colin's additional comments:

"The sacking of Jerusalem in Luke 21 by Titus, is NOT the same event that is prophesied yet to come in Matthew 24.

The Lord Jesus warned that many false prophets would rise in the last days, and indeed that has come to pass. Matthew 24.4-5, 24.11, 24.24 etc. He never once exhorted His people to listen to any latter day ‘prophets’.

God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets. Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom he also made the worlds. Hebrews 1.1-2.

The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken. Deuteronomy 18.15.

I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. Deuteronomy 18.18.

And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms concerning me. Luke 24.44."

I have now removed Whisler's link concerning preterism from this post Colin - thank you for picking up on it.

God bless