Search This Blog

Friday, 23 June 2017


Peace, peace, when there is no peace.. (Jeremiah 6:14; 8:11). 

Not many of you should become teachers, my brothers, for you know that we who teach will be judged with greater strictness. (James 3:1).

The false pre-tribulation prophets compared with the false prophet Hananiah in Jeremiah 28.

Hananiah's credentials and background were impressive: Hananiah the son of Azzur, the prophet from Gibeon. In addition, he spoke with certainty in the first person of the Lord in direct contradiction to Jeremiah's previous prophecies of judgement. The reticence of the true prophet Jeremiah makes a startling contrast. (Jeremiah 1:6 cf. Exodus 4:10; Amos 7:14).  The twice repeated false prophecy of Hananiah sealed his own death warrant! (Jeremiah 28:16-17 cf. Deuteronomy 13:5).

This is what the Lord Almighty, the God of Israel, says: ‘I will break the yoke of the king of Babylon. Within two years I will bring back to this place all the articles of the Lord’s house that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon removed from here and took to Babylon.  I will also bring back to this place Jehoiachina son of Jehoiakim king of Judah and all the other exiles from Judah who went to Babylon,’ declares the Lord, ‘for I will break the yoke of the king of Babylon.’ ” (Jeremiah 28:2-4).

“This is what the Lord says: ‘In the same way I will break the yoke of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon off the neck of all the nations within two years.’ ” (Jeremiah 28 10-11).

Basically Hananiah's contemporaries had a choice to either believe Jeremiah's previous genuine words from the Lord, or to drink the Kool-Aid of Hananiah. They chose the latter. Jeremiah's counter statement is key to the problem:

The prophets who preceded you and me from ancient times prophesied war, famine, and pestilence against many countries and great kingdoms. As for the prophet who prophesies peace, when the word of that prophet comes to pass, then it will be known that the Lord has truly sent the prophet.” (Jeremiah 28:8-9).

Regarding the timing of the rapture, we need to look at the teaching from ancient times i.e. to Jesus Christ Himself and to his apostles, particularly the Apostle Paul and the Book of Revelation. There was no such teaching in the early church as pretribulationism, in fact quite the opposite:

Let no one deceive you in any way. For that day will not come, unless the rebellion comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction, who opposes and exalts himself against every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, proclaiming himself to be God. (2 Thessalonians 2:3-4).

Then the dragon became furious with the woman (Israel) and went off to make war on the rest of her offspring, on those who keep the commandments of God and hold to the testimony of Jesus. (Revelation 12:17).

“Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name’s sake. And then many will fall away and betray one another and hate one another. And many false prophets will arise and lead many astray. And because lawlessness will be increased, the love of many will grow cold. But the one who endures to the end will be saved. And this gospel of the kingdom will be proclaimed throughout the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.." (Matthew 24:9-14).

When these false prophets are proved wrong it will be too late! The inevitable failure of this much-desired event at the wrongly predicted time will cause despondence and doubt, and it will happen simultaneously with the unprecedented persecution of the Antichrist. Hope deferred makes the heart sick.. (Proverbs 13:12).

We should be very wary of confident teachers who are essentially prophesying peace and safety in the name of the Lord. (Jeremiah 28:1 cf. Daniel 8:25; 1 Thessalonians 5:3). Like Hananiah the pre-trib teachers are teaching lies by the spirit of Antichrist.

 ..you have made this people trust in a lie. (Jeremiah 28:15).

Deuteronomy 13 defines the sin of false prophecy as: "rebellion against the Lord". Even when a prophecy is accompanied by a sign, if it goes against the direct Word of God then it is false. (Deuteronomy 13:1). Going even further, the scriptures compare the sin of rebellion with the sin of divination:

For rebellion is as the sin of divination, and presumption is as iniquity and idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the LORD, he has also rejected you from being king.” (1 Samuel 15:23).

Elliot: "Opposition to the will of God is as bad as divination by the help of evil spirits, which is tantamount to apostasy from God: obstinate resistance to Him is no better than worshipping idols (vanity or emptiness) and images (teraphim: see note on 1 Samuel 19:13). Disobedience is in fact idolatry, because it elevates self-will into a god." {1}
Gills Exposition: ".....the sentence of rejection was pronounced upon him, and the bestowal of the government on his posterity was cut off." {1}

In fact Saul did go on to commit the sin of divination with the medium of En-dor and afterwards he committed suicide. (1 Samuel 28:7-19; 31:4). It never ends well for those who persistently reject the Word of the Lord and teach from their own minds. (Ezekiel 13:17). The pre-trib teachers/prophets nullify the scriptures and lead the people astray. There is nothing new under the sun. (Ecclesiastes 1:9).

For they are a rebellious people,
lying children,
children unwilling to hear
the instruction of the Lord;
who say to the seers, “Do not see,”
and to the prophets, “Do not prophesy to us what is right;
speak to us smooth things,
prophesy illusions,
leave the way, turn aside from the path,
let us hear no more about the Holy One of Israel.”
Therefore thus says the Holy One of Israel,
“Because you despise this word
and trust in oppression and perverseness
and rely on them,
therefore this iniquity shall be to you
like a breach in a high wall, bulging out and about to collapse,
whose breaking comes suddenly, in an instant;
and its breaking is like that of a potter’s vessel
that is smashed so ruthlessly
that among its fragments not a shard is found
with which to take fire from the hearth,
or to dip up water out of the cistern.”
(Isaiah 30:9-14).

The persistent pre-tribulation rapture teachers fall into the same category as Hananiah and are in rebellion against God. God will hold these teachers accountable. (2 Peter 2:1). Various posts have been published on this site with sound theological exegesis against the pre-trib rapture, and not least exposing the blatant dishonesty of many of the leaders and teachers that promote it. There are some teachers who appear to genuinely believe the lie of pretribulationism, and there are those that avoid the subject altogether, considering it too controversial. The former have an obligation to seek the Lord for the sake of the elect and to "prove all things". The latter have an obligation to face up to their responsibilities and to teach the truth about this important doctrine.

The Assemblies of God (USA) offers a lame eisegesis and integrates the Day of the Lord with the Great Tribulation:

"The weight of Scripture supports a pre-Tribulation Rapture. Wherever teaching about the Second Coming occurs in the New Testament, imminence is underscored." {2} 

The New Testament describes the day of the Lord as a day of wrath and judgement upon the wicked that does not include the reign of the Antichrist or the great tribulation as the AOG asserts. Old Testament scriptures: (Isaiah 2:12; 13:6, 9-11; Ezekiel 13:5, 30:3; Joel 1:15, 2:1,11,31; 3:14; Amos 5:18,20; Obadiah 15; Zephaniah 1:7,14-16; Zechariah 14:1; Malachi. 4:5) New Testament scriptures: (Acts 2:20; 1 Thessalonians 5:2; 2 Thessalonians 2:2; 2 Peter 3:10). It is also alluded to in other passages (Revelation 6: 12-17; 16:14). Hence, imminence has nothing at all to do with a pre-tribulation rapture!

Similarly, Thomas Ice (PTRC), who has devoted many years of his life to teaching lies, also insists upon imminence. We only have to look at the pre-trib camp, previously led by Tim LaHaye, and their association with cult leader Sun Myung Moon (Moonies) and the Council for National Policy (CNP), to make a right judgement about their integrity! These men have forfeited the right to call themselves bible teachers and prophets!

In addition, those who promote a mid-trib rapture are a concern since they would also have Christians escape the persecution of the Antichrist.

A final note about Jacob Prasch of Moriel Ministries. Prasch appears to have the timing of the rapture right, but his false Intra-Seal teaching is totally unscriptural. Prasch mishandles and mutilates the scriptures in a number of key areas! I believe that Intra-Seal is a deliberate attempt to cause a snare to Christians during the 70th week of Daniel.{3}

Do your best to present yourself to God as one approved, a worker who has no need to be ashamed, rightly handling the word of truth. (2 Timothy 2:15).

{1} http://biblehub.com/commentaries/1_samuel/15-23.htm
{2} https://ag.org/Beliefs/Topics-Index/The-Rapture-of-the-Church
{3} https://www.amazon.co.uk/INTRA-SEAL-RAPTURE-DECEPTION-EXPOSED-devised-ebook/dp/B06X6N2JJT/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1498213260&sr=8-1&keywords=treena+gisborn

Sunday, 18 June 2017


      Thomas Ice - Protector of the shrinking Principality of Pretribulatia - believes that his "texas receptus" interpretation of II Thess. 2:3 is much better than that of his mentor, the late Dr. John Walvoord!
     Ice impudently states (in his widely noticed web article "The Rapture in 2 Thessalonians 2:3") that "I believe that there is a strong possibility that 2 Thessalonians 2:3 is speaking of the rapture," adding that "The fact that APOSTASIA [caps mine] most likely has the meaning of physical departure is a clear support for pretribulationism."
     In his book "The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation" (p. 125) Walvoord writes:
     "E. Schuyler English and others have suggested that the word [apostasia] means literally 'departure' and refers to the rapture itself. Gundry argues at length against this interpretation, which would explicitly place the rapture before the day of the Lord, and his evidence is quite convincing. English is joined by the Greek scholar Kenneth S. Wuest but their view has not met with general acceptance by either pretribulationists or posttribulationists. A number of pretribulationists have interpreted the apostasy in this way as the departure of the church, but the evidence against this translation is impressive. In that case Gundry, seconded by Ladd, is probably right: the word refers to doctrinal defection of the special character that will be revealed in the day of the Lord [which "day" Walvoord views as "the great tribulation"]."
     So even though Dr. Robert Gundry's evidence "is quite convincing" and Ice's "has not met with general acceptance" and evidence against Ice's assertion "is impressive" and Gundry and Ladd are "probably right," Thomas Ice keeps beating his desperate dispensational drum in the ears of the Walvoord who was the No. 1 pretrib authority for many decades!
     Gundry's uber-great book "The Church and the Tribulation" (pp. 114-118) dismantles, piece by piece, the doctrinal defectors of II Thess. 2:3. For example, Gundry says that "it is from this least important source [classical Greek - in which "simple departure by no means predominates"] that English draws his argument."
     After English (followed by Ice) seeks support from Reformation-era Bible translations, Gundry points out that "the appeal to early English translations unwittingly reveals weakness, because in the era of those versions lexical studies in NT Greek were almost nonexistent and continued to be so for many years. The papyri had not yet been discovered, and the study of the LXX had hardly begun."
     Gundry adds: "In 2:1 Paul mentions 'our gathering' second in order to the Parousia. In light of the immediately preceding description of the posttribulational advent [II Thess. 1:7-10], it seems natural to regard the Parousia as a reference to that event rather than a sudden switch to a pretribulational Parousia unmentioned in the first chapter and unsupported in I Thessalonians. Several verses later (2:8) the Parousia again refers to the posttribulational advent of Christ."
     If the "falling away" (2:3) is the same (pretrib) rapture Ice sees in "gathering" (2:1), why did Paul use totally different Greek words ("episunagoges" and "apostasia") if he was discussing the very same event?
     A Google article ("Pretrib Rapture - Hidden Facts") reveals that pretrib rapturism historically has had more than two stages. Stage 1: In 1830 the "rapture" aspect of the second advent was stretched forward and became a separate coming. Stage 2: In the early 1900s various teachers stretched forward the "day of the Lord" (what Darby and Scofield never dared to do!). Stage 3: In recent times the "fact" involving "apostasia" has created "the-rapture-must-happen-before-the-rapture" fantasy which Ice etc. can hang on to with at least their eyelids!
     For more info about Ice, Google "Pretrib Rapture Pride," "Thomas Ice (Bloopers)," and "Be Careful in Polemics - Peripatetic Learning."  For 300 pages of uncovered and highly endorsed documentation on pretrib history, see my book "The Rapture Plot" which is available at Armageddon Books etc.
     Remember: Ice-colored statements can be as dangerous as ice-covered pavements!


Instead, the greatest among you should be like the youngest, and the one who leads like the one who serves. (Luke 22:26).

I am very encouraged that Jacob Prasch appears to have removed all of his specific Intra-Seal teaching videos from YouTube. I am hoping that he has re-thought this subject; and I wonder whether he intends revising his doctrinal position about the identity of the Restrainer in 2 Thessalonians 2, at least to opinion rather than hard fact

It would be particularly helpful for a number of people to see Jacob revise his very confusing position on the whole of the 70th week of Daniel which has caused so much consternation in certain quarters. Such an action would also go a long way towards restoring the loss of confidence in this ministry that myself and others have experienced.

God gives grace to the humble (James 4:6).
Without God's compassion none of us could stand (Psalm 130:3).

God desires us to be real with each other rather than follow the stubborn and rebellious ways of the world and the apostates. I am on Messenger if anyone from Moriel or elsewhere wants to have a conversation.

Friday, 9 June 2017


"The Church of England is to vote on creating an official ‘baptism-style’ service to celebrate when transgender Christians change sex.
The controversial motion has dismayed traditionalists, who say the Bible teaches that gender is God-given.
But liberals said vicars have been forced to devise unofficial services to welcome sex-change worshippers and the Church should demonstrate its unambiguous acceptance of transsexuals....."

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4549058/Church-England-vote-baptism-transgender-people.html#ixzz4j31NCXRD

Such a move, if successful, would go directly against the scriptures. Conservative Synod member Andrea Williams, director of pressure group Christian Concern, said: "It is unclear why we are even debating this issue."

Liberal Synod member Jayne Ozanne: “The Bible teaches that we are each fearfully and wonderfully made, and we should therefore look to celebrate God’s gift of diversity in creation, not treat those of us who are non-heterosexual as having mental disorders that need to be ‘cured,' {1}

I would agree with Jayne Ozanne that we are each fearfully and wonderfully made... (Psalm 139:14). However, God does not contradict Himself. If He makes a person male or female, then who are we to argue with the unmistakable physical evidence before us? The scriptures warn us that there are severe consequences for those who distort the gospel of Christ. (Galatians 1:7). The liberal scripture twisters are playing a dangerous game that will not ultimately succeed. For I the LORD do not change.. (Malachi 3:6).

The scriptures are clear that God created humans to engage in sex exclusively within marriage between a male and a female. (Genesis 1:27, 28; Leviticus 18:22; Proverbs 5:18, 19). God condemns sexual relationships unless they are between a husband and wife, whether they are homosexual or heterosexual. (1 Corinthians 6:18). The apostle Paul instructed Christians not to judge those outside the church; that is God's business. However, those supposedly inside the church, those who profess to be Christians are a different matter entirely.

I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people— not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world. But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Is it not those inside the church whom you are to judge? God judges those outside. “Purge the evil person from among you.” (1 Corinthians 5:9-12).

It is a mistake to view anyone who is non-heterosexual as having a mental disorder that needs to be "cured". The bible teaches that all have sinned and come short of the glory of God. The "cure" so called, is a new creation in Jesus Christ, the new man. In other words, once someone has been born again and truly accepted Jesus Christ into his life, they become a different person.. the old has passed away the new has come. In fact without repentance and the new birth no one can stand (Ezra 9:15).

Do not marvel that I said to you, ‘You must be born again.’ (John 3:3-7).

Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come. (2 Corinthians 5:17).

If the Son shall make you free you shall be free indeed (John 8:36).

{1} http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/05/31/church-of-england-to-vote-on-baptism-style-services-to-honor-sex-changes/

Thursday, 8 June 2017


It is not good to be partial to the wicked or to deprive the righteous of justice. (Proverbs 18:5).

He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous are both alike an abomination to the LORD. (Proverbs 17:15).

..but Jesus said, “Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for to such belongs the kingdom of heaven.” (Matthew 19:14).

Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin (stumble), it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea. (Matthew 18:5-6).

The reticence of the current leader of the Jesus Army, Mick Haines, and other leaders who were part of Noel Stanton's "culture of authority" to give interviews speaks volumes. The saying that evil thrives when good men do nothing is invalid, since to do nothing in the face of evil is wicked. Why did no-one stand up against the monster Noel Stanton during his abusive regime? Was it more comfortable to turn a blind eye and to passively stand by when infants suffered physical abuse and maybe more? I imagine these hypocrites are still making a packet out of the charitable status of the Jesus Army and their free, often disadvantaged, work force! All for the common good of course!!! Woe to those who are responsible for the suffering of these little ones in past times!

A fresh report from the Northampton Chronicle and Echo:

Corporal punishment complaints at Northampton’s Jesus Army were not followed up... because it wasn’t illegal in the 70s and 80s.

Detectives did not pursue a number of claims of physical abuse against a Northampton-based religious sect because ‘corporal punishment’ was not illegal in the 1970s and 1980s.

Jesus Army members contacted the religious organisation between 2013 and 2015 to make allegations of physical abuse perpetrated within the community.

Fresh allegations about the head of the Jesus Army, Noel Stanton, have emerged.

These complaints were passed on to Northamptonshire Police along with a number of allegations of sexual abuse. The force formed operation Lifeboat to look into the sex assault claims, and is understood to be on the verge of making a number of prosecutions.

But the officer that led that investigation – detective chief inspector Ally White - has now confirmed that the force did not pursue a number of allegations of physical abuse, or ‘rodding’. The term is used to describe a form of physical beating using a cane or blunt implement, which would be illegal by today’s standards.

In a statement to the Chron this week, DCI White, said: “We have investigated allegations of physical assault - so-called ‘rodding’– from the 1970s up until the mid-1980s.

Noel Stanton founded the Jesus Army in 1969.

“However, these allegations were made at a time when corporal punishment was still legal in this country and no potential victims have since come forward to pursue a complaint. We have spoken to a lot of people in relation to these allegations.”

DCI White went on to confirm that police were in fact told of a number of abuse allegations some 14 years before Operation Lifeboat was formed, though he did not say why further action was not pursued then.

In its heyday the sect, which many have called a ‘cult’, operated a number of communal houses, often with several families living in them at a time.

Its leader and founder Noel Stanton operated a strict regime, which involved members paying into a communal fund and in some cases taking a vow of celibacy. The Jesus Army battle bus.

The Chronicle & Echo has learned that some of the physical abuse allegations related to a summer school run by the Jesus Army at Cornhill Manor in Pattishall. The purpose of the school was to provide activities for the children in the Jesus Army over the summer holidays.

The news that a number of physical abuse claims were made comes a month after the sect itself revealed claims of physical, sexual and financial abuse were made against the army’s deceased founder Noel Stanton.

In a statement made to an annual meeting, current leader Mick Haines claimed Stanton had operated in an ‘unaccountable position’.

However Mr Haines and senior leaders of the church – known as the apostolic order – have refused interviews with the Chron, even though former teacher Mr Haines has been with the sect since the 1970s. He also played a part in the running of the summer school in Pattishall.

Instead, all responses have been issued by Jesus Army spokesman, Laurence Cooper.

The organisation underwent a safeguarding review in 2015 carried out by another Christian organisation, the CCPAS. Though critics have questioned how thorough that review was, given that its scope was limited to looking at the current practices in place.

A former senior leader told the Chron the current apostolic team had a duty to respond to some of the allegations of historical abuse directly, rather than relying on an anonymous spokesman.

“I would say there is no problem with any of those guys giving interviews,” the source said.“Mick Haines is the most senior leader so of course he should. He may not be aware of all the facts.

“But in terms of the culture of authority, he himself was a part of that.

”A spokesman for the Jesus Army said: “Parents - and people in the church generally- are actively and strongly discouraged from physical violence of any sort. “If we became aware of anyone using physical punishment this would be a matter we would want to refer to social services and/or police.

“We encourage church members to be aware of what’s going on around them, and if they feel that there is a person being mistreated they should speak up.

“They are encouraged to voice any concerns to our safeguarding team, or the Police, or CCPAS.

“We want anyone who has experienced any sort of physical abuse at all to talk to the Police, or CCPAS, or to the Jesus Fellowship’s own safeguarding team, who will offer them every support.”


Further reading:
Jesus Army sex offender sentenced for string of indecent acts directed at children in Northamptonshire.

Sunday, 4 June 2017


     All of my books since 1973 have stated that Rev. Edward Irving and his followers (Irvingites) - as well as Margaret Macdonald - taught a pretribulation rapture before John Darby did.
     Margaret's 117-line pretrib "revelation" account (which, by the way, contains 59 Bible verses or parts of verses - about one in every other line) was admittedly not as detailed as the many articles in "The Morning Watch" (Irvingite journal) which from 1829 to 1833 clearly and extensively portrayed a pretrib rapture. Naturally my Darby-exalting critics gang up on Margaret so that they won't have to face up to overwhelming evidence that the Irvingites did in fact precede Darby!
     (While I'm at it - I wish now that I had never used terms like Margaret's "revelation" or "vision" even though others have. I should have referred only to her "view" or "Scriptural interpretation." If I had done so, my opponents wouldn't have had an excuse to associate "occult" or "witch" or "demon" with her totally Biblical discussion while playing the current rapture debate "game of gossip"!)
     Scofield and Ironside are among the Darby defenders who have boldly concluded, minus evidence, that pretrib rapturism never existed in Irvingite circles.
     Even Ernest Sandeen's "The Roots of Fundamentalism" (p. 64f) asserted that Irving and his followers didn't teach anything resembling a Darbyesque secret, pretrib rapture. (His conclusion was based on only two unrelated (!) prophetic utterances which were spoken many months after pretrib was first clearly taught in Irving's journal in Sep. 1830!) J. Barton Payne responded to Sandeen by writing that "MacPherson has once and for all overthrown Ernest Sandeen's assertions that the Irvingites never 'advocated any doctrine resembling the secret rapture' and that to connect J. N. Darby and early dispensationalism with Irving's church is 'a groundless and pernicious charge'....For serious students of the history of dispensationalism the study of MacPherson's discoveries has become a must." (Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, Winter, 1974)
     R. A. Huebner, a militant member of the Darbyist Plymouth Brethren, added his own name to the Irvingism-bashing list and even talked Walvoord, Ryrie, LaHaye and some other pretrib leaders into joining it. In his 1973 book Huebner actually stated: "The Irvingites (1828-1834) never held the pretribulation rapture or any 'any-moment' views." His 1991 book repeated this by declaring that "the Irvingite system was a complex" that can be found "in posttribulational writers."
     But the champion Irvingism-basher, who isn't bashful, is Thomas Ice whose Darby-shielding darts are multiplied and repeated on the internet, world without end. He makes sure that readers of his "When Did J. N. Darby Discover the Rapture?" piece will discover his repetition that "Irving never held to pretribulationism." In his "Myths of the Origin of Pretribulationism - Part II" he states that "One of Dave McPherson's strangest claims is that Edward Irving and the Irvingites taught a pre-trib rapture." And he even speaks disparagingly of "two British theologians" (Mark Patterson and Andrew Walker) who have written that "it is incontrovertible that Irving held to a pretribulation doctrine in a form that is developed and remarkably similar to contemporary dispensational views." (!)
     My book "The Rapture Plot" (available online) includes many quotes from Irvingites proving that they taught a pretrib rapture as well as pretribulationally-correct imminence. Here are just a few examples from several issues of "The Morning Watch":
     "Philadelphia" is described as worthy Christians who will be raptured before "the great tribulation" (TMW, Sep. 1830, p. 510)
     "...the great tribulation from which those dead in Christ, and those who shall then be alive and looking for him, shall be exempted, by being caught up to meet the Lord in the air...." (TMW, June 1831, p. 284)
     Walvoord's, LaHaye's, and Ice's "any-momentness" is clearly seen in this Irvingite journal which stated: "...we miss the true object of faith and hope in the coming of the Lord, not only when we overleap it altogether, but when we interpose any screen whatever; when we look for any event of persecution or tribulation, for any combination of kings, any gathering of people, any manifestation of Antichrist." (TMW, Dec. 1831, p. 253)
     One writer spoke of "the translation for the living...of which we may daily expect the accomplishment...." He added: "During this most horrible time of the reign of the last Antichrist, the risen and translated saints shall be with Christ...." (TMW, Mar. 1832, pp. 12-14)
     John Tudor, TMW editor, said that "some of these elect ones shall...be left in the great tribulation...after the translation of the saints...." He added that there is "nothing further to expect before the actual coming...." (TMW, Sep. 1832, pp. 11-12)
     "the literal time of 1260 days...does not commence till the moment of the translation of the saints...." (TMW, Sep. 1832, p. 48)
     It should be pointed out that during pretrib dispensationalism's earliest development, there were those who quickly changed from the prevailing posttrib historicism to pretrib futurism, some who changed later on, and some who never changed. Naturally Darby-guardsmen such as Huebner and Ice have selectively focused on historicist Irvingites and purposely covered up pretrib futurists among the same British group to make it appear to their trusting readers that the Irvingites were totally pretrib-deficient!
     My first paper on Biblical prophecy was written in 1968. If I could have known beforehand that Darby protectors would either ignore, smear, or pseudo-scholarly skip over Margaret's main point (a rapture before Antichrist's revealing) and deviously quote lines only before and after it (what Ice does repeatedly), I would have focused on the incredible quality and quantity of the output of the innovative Irvingites - and brought in Margaret only as the one they claimed as their inspiration.
     Even William Kelly, Darby's editor, knew that for 60 years evangelicalism had credited Irvingism, and not Darbyism, with pretribism. Which is why Kelly (while noting "the early prophesyings and tongues in Scotland" but adding that "we may pass these over") focused on Irvingite writings, and not Margaret's, in a lengthy series (1889-1890) in his own journal. Readers of "The Rapture Plot" know that Kelly, in Ice-like fashion, made so many dishonest changes while analyzing Irvingism in a supposedly fair and balanced way that evangelicalism, unable to examine hard-to-locate Irvingite writings, eventually accepted Kelly's revisionism, the goal of which was to project Darby as the pretrib rapture originator as well as the "father of dispensationalism" - and we know how well Kelly was successful!
     I have focused on pretrib rapture beginnings for 40 years and have offered $1000 if anyone can show where I have ever dishonestly concealed or changed anything in any important rapture-related document. Unlike my opponents, my book royalties have always gone not to any individual but to a nonprofit corporation which has never paid any salary to anyone. While you're wondering if you should obtain my 300-page book "The Rapture Plot," I invite you to read my many internet articles including "Famous Rapture Watchers," "Pretrib Rapture Diehards," "Humbug Huebner," "Thomas Ice (Bloopers)" and "Thomas Ice - Hired Gun," "X-Raying Margaret," "Deceiving and Being Deceived," and "Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty."

Saturday, 20 May 2017


 [Author's note: Although I composed this a month after the 911 New York City disaster, it should still be of interest. -----D.M.]
     A couple decades ago I learned how serious Tim LaHaye had become when it came to my pretrib history research----and it wasn't very becoming.
     On January 5, 1981 he had sent a letter from the Scott Memorial Baptist Church he then pastored in the San Diego area to an evangelical publisher in another state. In the letter, which later came into my hands, LaHaye bluntly discussed yours truly and told the recipient: "Praise God you're going to answer this turkey----if I didn't already have 89 irons in the fire I'd take it on----some one should!"
     Back in those days LaHaye was well-known for his bestselling Spirit-Controlled Temperament book (temperaments that fundamentalist and evangelical critics have traced to the world of the occult!). Unfortunately that book didn't reveal the type of temperament LaHaye could possess (a LaHaodicean one?) in order to call me a "turkey." Maybe his pretrib "feathers" had been ruffled by the many evangelical leaders who'd "gobbled" up my research and then praised it during the previous decade:
     In his 1974 book When Is Jesus Coming Again, J. Barton Payne reflected it when he wrote that "the dispensational position...began only in 1830 with J. N. Darby's acceptance of Margaret Macdonald's revelation in Port Glasgow of a dispensationally divided return."
     During the same year Christianity Today called it a "staunch defense" and Moody Monthly (while Jerry Jenkins was a top name there) referred to my "careful, factual sleuthing."
     In Canada The Prairie Overcomer at Prairie Bible Institute concluded that "MacPherson's case seems to be watertight" while The Witness (the oldest and largest Darbyist Brethren magazine in England!) declared: "What he [MacPherson] succeeds in establishing is that the view outlined was first stated by a certain Margaret Macdonald...early in 1830." (Who knows the British, and the British ways of speaking, better than the British do?)
     Some other comments during that period came from Harold Ockenga's letter ("You have done your research well"), Ian S. Rennie's Dreams, Visions and Oracles ("it is likely that [Margaret's revelation] was grist for Darby's mill"), and J. Gordon Melton in the Encyclopedia of American Religions ("The best scholarship available [views Margaret as the pretrib originator]").
     With reactions like these coming from a noticeable percentage of the evangelical literati, you can see why Tim was dispensationally distraught over the possibility that comments from thinking evangelicals might have a dire effect on his ability to keep on making pretrib (la)hay while the sun was shining!
     But now let's fast forward until we reach the year 1992 and the arrival of LaHaye's No Fear of the Storm----a book that's had no fear of being exposed as one of the most shabby, slipshod, slovenly (and, yes, even dishonest) prophecy books ever!
     While flipping LaHaye's pages in order to spot his comments on the pretrib origin (the way my book The Rapture Plot describes it), I quickly found one sentence on page 180 that has four historical errors.
      In it he asserts that 19th century (Plymouth) Brethren scholar S. P. Tregelles claimed in two of his books, spaced 11 years apart, that fellow Brethren member J. N. Darby derived pretrib from the Jews and Margaret Macdonald. Since Margaret wasn't Jewish, LaHaye sees Tregelles naming two different sources and contradicting himself.
     If you've been totally immersed in pretrib rapture origin research since 1970 (as I have), you'll soon find (as I did) these four errors:
     1. The two Tregelles works were not two books but an article (1855) and a book (1864).
     2. They were nine years apart.
     3. The article spoke only of "Judaisers" within Christianity. (This was the first time I'd ever found anyone claiming that the Jews  had been blamed for originating pretrib!)
     4. The book referred to "an 'utterance' in Mr. Irving's Church." (Margaret never even visited Edward Irving's church!)
     LaHaye obviously had been influenced by other writers, including R. A. Huebner and John Walvoord, who had previously aired the supposed Tregelles contradiction. (Elsewhere in the present book I show that Tregelles did not contradict himself.)
     After being flabbergasted by this blunder-packed sentence, I decided to check the accuracy of LaHaye's reproduction of Margaret Macdonald's key 1830 revelation. With all 117 lines of her revelation in front of me (as found in my books including The Incredible
Cover-up and The Great Rapture Hoax), I began comparing LaHaye's version with it. Everything matched perfectly during the first few lines.
     But when I got to lines 10-11, LaHaye's copy spoke of Margaret's "great burst." Was this a reference to the "inbreaking of God...about to burst on this earth" (lines 42-43)? Or perhaps her vision of the final collapse of the pretrib view? Well, neither. Between the words "great" and "burst" LaHaye had omitted "darkness and error about it; but suddenly what it was." This omission can keep his readers in the dark concerning her cultic pride in thinking that only she could really explain "the sign of the Son of man" (Matt. 24:30)!
     In addition to a variety of other copying errors, LaHaye also omitted eight words in lines 16-17, a word in line 51, another word in line 58, 11 words in lines 74-75, nine words in lines 76-77, and eight words in lines 111-112----sins of "omission" that can easily result in faulty analyses of Macdonald's prophetic words! (I wrote LaHaye in regard to his many copying errors. He never responded.)
     LaHaye's version of Margaret's words is actually found in Robert Norton's Memoirs of James & George Macdonald, of Port-Glasgow (1840). But somehow he had prefaced it as being part of Norton's The Restoration of Apostles and Prophets; In the Catholic Apostolic Church (1861). All I had to do was find someone who had carelessly combined the 1840 text with the 1861 title.
     Within minutes, while going through my files, I ran across a 1989 publication that had the same combination. And it had the same copying errors----including the same 48 omitted words----in the same places! The author was Thomas Ice!
     (When LaHaye decided to plagiarize Ice's reproduction of Margaret's revelation instead of doing his own research, he didn't realize that Ice's sloppiness would trip up himself as well as Ice. But of course they are still friends and partners----especially in connection with the Pre-Trib Research Center----because they are sloppy and dishonest birds of a feather! Incidentally, Ice never responded after my letter to him asked about his many copying errors.)
     In addition to LaHaye's "bumped" words, I tallied 84 other errors he makes when quoting various writers on 27 other pages discussing pretrib beginnings. LaHaye omits 11 words when quoting Walvoord's The Rapture Question: Revised. Walvoord, echoing Huebner, was asserting that my evidence has not proven that Margaret and Irving taught the pretrib view. But readers are kept in the dark about the assertion in the book in question because LaHaye somehow deletes what Walvoord was concluding!
     On page 169 LaHaye says that at the Library of Congress he obtained photocopies of Manuel Lacunza's work, the title of which is The Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty. Perhaps he can explain why on two pages this title appears as The Coming of Messiah in Power and Glory and is listed on a later page as The Coming of Christ in Power and Great Glory. Equally serious are his book's other copying errors including erroneous sources and page numbering in footnotes as well as inaccurate historical dates in the text.
     Something else. If I fail to rectify some notions that LaHaye has repeated, others in the 20th century tradition of copying (and miscopying) may very well repeat and even embellish them.
     LaHaye gives the impression that my father, Norman, changed from pretrib to posttrib during his Southern California pastorate from which he was ousted, and that Biola's position on the rapture was the only one ever held by that Los Angeles school. LaHaye even has a chapter about me entitled "MacPherson's Vendetta" and assumes that personal revenge on my part is the reason for my decades-long research on pretrib beginnings.
     For the record here are my responses:
     1. My father changed from pretrib to posttrib before his 1944 book Triumph Through Tribulation. Through meetings in my parents' living room, the church in question was formed in 1947. Folks knew about his previous change, but he was always a calm and scholarly preacher, almost never brought up posttrib, and never made any rapture view a test of fellowship. Later on, some pretrib outsiders joined, evidently intent on making the church a pretrib church.
     I still have the handwritten notes that my mother took at the May 16, 1951 ouster meeting. One of the voiced criticisms of my father that she recorded: "He has no right to interpret prophecy contrary to Scofield." (This critic obviously was influenced only by Scripture and not by human agency in the same way Darby was!)
     2. The doctrinal statement in Biola's catalog says merely that the "Lord Jesus is coming again to this earth, personally, bodily, and visibly." The school's founders chose such a broad statement because they wanted persons to have freedom to hold and discuss what were then viewed as non-essentials: for example, differing tribulational and millennial views.
     Nowadays the Biola catalog includes this explanatory note (following the doctrinal statement): "The Scriptures are to be interpreted according to dispensational distinctives with the conviction that the return of the Lord for His Church will be premillennial, before the Tribulation, and that the Millennium is to be the last of the dispensations."
     When I applied in 1952 for admission to the original Bible Institute of Los Angeles campus in downtown L. A., I was given the original doctrinal statement which allows for non-conflicting non-essentials.
     Since my father had been a schoolmate of Biola's president at Princeton Seminary (hardly a pretrib school), I saw no harm in occasionally sharing copies of my father's 1944 book with some student friends and some of my teachers. If the school had told me to stop this, I would have. If I had been a threat all year to Biola's "official" position, why did it wait until just two weeks before the end of the school year to kick me out?
     Throughout this century pretrib has changed from being a non-essential to being an expedient essential at Biola and many similar schools, primarily because of its tremendous fund-raising potential.
     3. LaHaye concludes wrongfully that my pretrib origin research of a quarter of a century is nothing more than my vengeful reaction to what happened to my family in the 1950's.
     If so, it must be one of the slowest reactions ever. I didn't even wonder about the origin until two decades after the California incidents. Long before my research began, numerous tragedies including untimely death had overtaken the ringleaders in the church trouble. During the years between the early 1950's and the early 1970's (when my research began), I was never bitter towards anyone at either the church or Biola----and haven't been down to the present day.
     In the same No Fear book of his, LaHaye has an entire chapter discussing my books. The fair and honest thing, when citing books, is to list the books in footnotes or at least in a bibliography----unless a writer has something to hide. The reason LaHaye doesn't list any of my works in this manner is that he is neither fair nor honest!
     As if all of the above isn't enough, there's even plagiarism in some of LaHaye's books! I'll give an example by comparing Hal Lindsey's There's A New World Coming (1973) with LaHaye's Understanding the Last Days (1998).
     On p. 281 Lindsey wrote: "The New Testament refers to the 'Book of Life' eight times, and although the Old Testament doesn't call it by that name, it refers three times to a book in which names are written. This book contains the name of every person born into the world. If by the time he dies, a person has not received God's provision of sacrifice to remove sin, then his name is blotted out of this 'Book of Life.'"
     On pp. 192, 194 LaHaye wrote: "The New Testament refers to the book of life eight different times, and although the Old Testament does not call it by that name, it does allude three times to a book in which names are written...The book of life is that book in which the names of all people ever born into the world are written. If, at the time of a person's death, he has not called upon the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation, his name is blotted out of the book of life."
     After I told LaHaye in a letter that I had found plagiarism in his books, he sent me the one and only letter I've ever gotten from him, dated March 3, 1999. His first two sentences said: "You are the first person who (to my knowledge) has ever accused me of plagiarizing anything from anyone. And with forty books in print I would think someone would have if it were true." I immediately sent him evidence that he had plagiarized various books by Walvoord and Lindsey. To this day he has never responded in connection with the proof that I sent to him!
     My book The Rapture Plot has an appendix exhibiting plagiarism, by means of comparison quotes, in popular pretrib prophecy books. Not only is Tim LaHaye's plagiarism portrayed, but there's proof also of the same literary thievery in writings by Jerry Falwell, Ed Hindson, Ed Dobson, Charles Ryrie,  Paul Tan, and Jack Van Impe, for starters! (For some little known shocks about LaHaye, Google "Pretrib Rapture Diehards" and note "1992.")
     If students at Christian Heritage College (LaHaye's former stomping ground) or Falwell's Liberty University were to plagiarize their neighbors' answers during an exam, they'd be in danger of getting an "F" for the exam and maybe for the entire course.
     But when pretrib leaders cut corners and cheat in print, which of course allows them to turn out rapture rush jobs much more quickly, they are awarded honorary (if not honorable) degrees----like the Doctor of Literature degree that Falwell's school gave to LaHaye!
     LaHaye gives the impression these days that his huge book sales are proof that he's being blessed by the Lord. Well, if financial success is the most important standard (and it seems to be in the eyes of many pretrib authors and publishers), then the Lord must also be blessing the Mafia and Columbian drug lords and even Osama Bin Ladin!
     But when does success become greed? LaHaye is currently suing fellow Christians over the Left Behind film rights! His lawsuit even states that he has suffered "emotional and mental stress, including anxiety, worry, mental anguish and sleeplessness"----characteristics, as you can tell, of Spirit-controlled temperament!
     Jeremiah 17:11 is a verse that LaHaye has somehow left behind. It says that "he that getteth riches, and not by right, shall leave them in the midst of his days, and at his end shall be a fool."
     Finally, here's the big question:
     In light of recently uncovered evidence revealing the long-covered-up, sordid history of the pretrib rapture view, and in light of the fact that God's judgment of careless and apostate Christendom is rapidly increasing these days, will Tim LaHaye temper his outlook and change his temperament or will he lose his temper, let his temperature rise, and become temperamental?