By Dave MacPherson
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."
Links to Dave's Books
Incredible Cover Up
The Rapture Plot
The unbelievable pre-trib origin: The recent discovery of a well-known theory's beginning, and its incredible cover-up
Rapture
The late great pre-trib rapture