Above: Chris Quintana's defence of Chuck Smith and his prediction that the rapture would occur in 1981 due to a misunderstanding of "this generation" in Matthew 24:34.
Chris Quintana spent several minutes insisting that Smith’s prediction was not a “Thus saith the Lord” prophecy—in other words, it was not a direct revelation from God. That distinction functions as an excuse, but it does not resolve the issue. Date‑setting is inherently reckless, and Calvary Chapel has been trying to defend Smith’s misstep ever since. Quintana’s approach feels like an attempt to whitewash a serious error—one that Smith never explained, never corrected, and never owned publicly.
"We should realize that we're all part of the Body of Christ and that there aren't any real divisions in the Body. We're all one. What a glorious day when we discover that God loves the Baptists! -- And the Presbyterians, and the Methodists, and the Catholics. We're all His and we all belong to Him. We see the whole Body of Christ, and we begin to strive together rather than striving against one another" (p157). (emphasis mine).
Chuck Smith "I believe that the generation of 1948 is the last generation. Since a generation of judgment is forty years and the Tribulation period lasts seven years, I believe the Lord could come back for His Church any time before the Tribulation starts, which would mean anytime before 1981.
..However, it is possible that Jesus is dating the beginning of the generation from 1967, when Jerusalem was again under Israeli control for the first time since 587 B.C. We don’t know for sure which year actually marks the beginning of the last generation.”
“If the generation begins in 1967 instead of 1948, the timeline shifts, but the expectation remains within that window.” (1967 variant). pp. 35–36 of Chuck Smith’s 1978 booklet End Times.
Smith’s 1981 rapture prediction was not an isolated remark; he repeated it in print, including in Future Survival (1973) and Snatched Away (1976), as documented by Calvary Chapel Wiki’s entry on the 1981 prediction.1
People who acknowledge their mistakes demonstrate genuine integrity—something vital for all believers, but especially influential Bible teachers who carry public trust. Refusal to admit error is driven by fleshly impulses: fear of consequences and the instinct to preserve one’s image. Scripture offers no justification for either. Chuck Smith should have addressed his error publicly, but he chose not to. It is neither wise nor honest to excuse this or to attempt to sanitise his legacy by glossing over it.
Addressing the question: "this generation"
In Matthew 24:34, “this generation” is usually explained in one of three ways.
Preterist: Jesus is referring to His contemporaries.
Futurist: A future “fig tree generation”—the group alive when the end‑time events begin will live to see them completed.
Corporate Israel: “Generation” refers to Israel as a persistent, covenant‑breaking people, echoing Isaiah 6 and the recurring biblical theme of Israel’s resistance to God and rejection of the Messiah until the end of the age.
I find myself resonating with the third view, especially after hearing Peter Goeman’s argument.*
Further Concerns
Chuck Smith was ecumenical and made the unequivocal assertions that Roman Catholics are Christians! In his book, Answers For Today (1993), he made the following ecumenical statement:
"We should realize that we're all part of the Body of Christ and that there aren't any real divisions in the Body. We're all one. What a glorious day when we discover that God loves the Baptists! -- And the Presbyterians, and the Methodists, and the Catholics. We're all His and we all belong to Him. We see the whole Body of Christ, and we begin to strive together rather than striving against one another" (p157). (emphasis mine).
On another occasion, Smith stated unequivocally that Roman Catholics are Christians: "I had a cousin who was a mother superior in the Catholic Church and she was just a wonderful Christian. I loved her and we had great conversations together and I didn't try to convert her from Catholicism, nor did she try to convert me into becoming a Catholic.. it is just we both recognise that we had the same Lord and the same faith and so forth.." He goes on to say that the differences between Christians and Catholics are not that great - his conclusion: "Catholics are basically Christians too." 2
Apart from Smith's false rapture prediction and ecumenism, he regularly appeared on the apostate TV network TBN. False teacher Paul Crouch referred to Smith as a "dear friend" after his death.3 Smith was also a "good friend" of false teacher Rick Warren. Friendships and associations with deceivers such as Paul Crouch and Rick Warren should be unacceptable to any believer committed to biblical integrity.
Smith also continued to sanction the ministry of his close associate, Don Stewart, after his adultery. Don Stewart left his wife and two teenage daughters for no good reason and married another woman in 2011. (Matthew 19:19).4 Smith and Stewart had a long association going back to the early days of Calvary Chapel at Costa Mesa, and they jointly hosted Pastors Perspective for a number of years. Don Stewart continues a high-profile ministry in association with Calvary Chapel despite being an adulterer! He is another "prophecy expert" and false teacher who relentlessly promotes the pretrib rapture error.
Chuck Smith, Paul Cain and the Branham Movement
John Collins, founder of William Branham Historical Research and the Leaving the Message YouTube channel, has documented extensive, verifiable connections between Chuck Smith and Paul Cain, whose ministry is explicitly framed as a continuation of Branham‑style, Latter Rain‑adjacent revivalism. Smith’s early ministry context placed him within the same networks. Collins has published evidence of a 1989 confrontation involving Paul Cain, Chuck Smith, and Jack Deere, following Smith’s public exposure of Cain’s homosexuality, high-flying lifestyle, financial misconduct, and fraudulent spiritual gifts. During that meeting, Cain warned Smith that “certain things could come out”, a statement Cain himself acknowledged as “spiritual blackmail”. Smith subsequently backed down, issued a public apology, and retracted his accusations.5
John Collins links this event to the rise of "cover-up culture" within Charismatic Christianity, and he asks some very pertinent questions: "And they (the allegations) would have caused Paul Cain severe damage to his ministry, and I don't know that he really would have recovered from this. And again, look at this intersection in time. Had Paul Cain been stopped, then would there have been an IHOP KC, if not an IHOPKC, how far would the NAR have developed with its seven mountains mandate agenda?"6
In 2004 Cain admitted to being an alcoholic and a homosexual and agreed to a process of restoration.6
Chuck Smith's theological departures are too substantial to minimise or whitewash. His date setting, ecumenism and associations with dubious figures such as Paul Cain represent serious breaches; they are not peripheral missteps. This pattern indicates his willingness to subordinate scripture when it conflicted with his objectives.
I value Chris Quintana’s ministry and regularly listen to his verse‑by‑verse teaching on YouTube. Even so, his loyalty to Chuck Smith is misplaced and contradicts the scriptures. Calvary Chapel’s commitment to the pretribulation rapture introduces yet another significant doctrinal problem, deepening the already‑troubling theological legacy associated with Smith. Chris Quintana would be well advised to reconsider his alignment with Smith and engage honestly with the documented evidence.
Further Links
