[google28b52e0868d1e307.html]

Search This Blog

Friday, 28 July 2017

CHARISMATICS & PRETRIB RAPTURE BY DAVE MACPHERSON

    Question: Why on earth would any charismatic believe in a pretrib rapture?
     You may recall my recent article unveiling "Dallas Seminary Secrets." In it I wondered why DTS president John Walvoord, when publicly opposing my pretrib origin research, would lean almost exclusively on a biased, Darby-idolyzing, no-theology-degree-holding fanatic like R. A. Huebner instead of his own seminary profs!
     And here's something else about the late Huebner that will make charismatics cringe.
     The 1973 Huebner booklet that Walvoord leaned on had a chapter titled "The Allegation that the (Truth of the) Pretribulation Rapture Came from a Demon."
     Huebner's goal was to deviously portray Margaret Macdonald and Irvingites (all of whom taught pretrib before Darby did) as "demonic" or under "demon" influence so that no one would believe that Darby (whom Huebner saw as the pretrib originator) would ever have been influenced by Macdonald (whom he visited in mid-1830) or any of Edward Irving's followers!
     My book "The Rapture Plot" quotes several that Huebner quoted who wrote about pretrib beginnings. Here are the quotes. I have added, in parentheses, the way Huebner dishonestly summarized the quotes later on in the same chapter in order to see "demons" where none existed:
     In 1864 S. P. Tregelles wrote: "It came...from that which falsely pretended to be the Spirit of God." (Huebner: "In 1864, he said it came from a demon.")
     In 1903 William Kelly referred to the Irvingite "oracles." (Huebner: Kelly was talking about "Irvingite demon-inspired utterances.")
     In 1956 H. A. Baker said that pretrib came from a "spirit." (Huebner: Baker said it came from a "demon.")
     In 1957 Oswald J. Smith declared that pretrib came from "a vision received by a woman" in Irving's church. (Huebner: Smith said it came from a "demon.")
     In 1962 J. Barton Payne traced pretrib to "a woman...speaking in tongues." (Huebner: Payne traced it to a "demon.")
     [I should add, for the sake of accuracy, that Margaret did not begin to speak in tongues until several months after she had her history-making pretrib rapture revelation in the spring of 1830. Therefore, the pretrib rapture concept did not spring from "tongues," as a few have wrongfully asserted.]
     Note Huebner's gross exaggeration while creating his "demon" straw men. Tregelles mentioned pretense and lack of spirituality, Kelly spoke of human mouthpieces, Baker's "spirit" can mean "force" or "mood," Smith's "vision" can mean "interpretation," and Payne merely credited a woman tongues-speaker!
     My "Plot" book summarized the above by saying:
     "Charismatics will be happy to learn that leading pretrib authority John Walvoord, when opposing my research, leans not on just a non-charismatic like Scofield but on a Huebner who's so violently anti-charismatic he can easily, and glibly, and repeatedly equate charismatic gifts with Satanic demonism!"
     I now go back to my earlier question: Why on earth would any charismatic believe in a pretrib rapture?




1 comment:

colin said...

Is it not generally acknowledged by all believers that we have three great enemies, the world, the flesh and the devil? Many struggle to separate these three entities, their boundaries exist very much in the shades. From the above article, was Huebner wrong to ascribe the various quotes to "demons"? S.P.Tregelles, for one example, when he said "...falsely pretended to be the Spirit of God." what do we make of this? Many today are too quick to blame demons for just about anything that goes wrong, we have heard it said many times (in the past such emanated from my own lips); "whatever POSSESSED me to do such and such?" Yet the inspired penman James tells us "EACH man is tempted, when he is drawn away by his OWN lust, and enticed." I struggle (at the present moment, at least) to be entirely dogmatic about some of these things, but is it not evident that whether one is possessed, or deceived by a wicked/evil spirit, the resulting consequence is EXACTLY the same?

Demon/devil possession was clearly VERY rife in the NT period, yet they did not exist in the OT era, as we understand them to be (they are commonly reckoned to be fallen angels), but their counterparts certainly did, that is the satyrs, he-goats, graven & molten images and whatever else apostate Israel worshipped. In a soon coming Day demonic entities (those whom Satan dragged down with him in Revelation 12.4 (prior to the Lord's incarnation) will be let loose as per Rev 9.14 at the time of the Lord's Second Advent in glory.

This is a very difficult subject that should not be lightly passed over. I hate the manifest errors of the charismatic Pentecostal movement with every bent of my body, but I have no doubt that God raised this movement to counteract error in established Calvinistic churches where the gracious work of the Holy Spirit was given little prominence.

Going back to the pre-tribulation rapture, I am entirely clear in my own mind that this teaching did not emanate from God's word; if not from thence, where from? Can the source be any other than the arch deceiver? Who or what-other than an evil spirit would cause any to pervert the truth?

God bless.