Dyspensacjonalizm

[Lash]

3. "kazał się nazywać Bogiem" - papież jako "ojciec święty" i "Bóg na ziemi"

Wielce naciągane, cesarze kazali się nazywać bogami, ale nie papieże, natomiast antychryst będzie to robił.

Nie tylko.
Np papiez rzekl

http://biblelight.net/l13-pgp.htm
But since We hold upon this earth the place of God Almighty, - Od czasu gdy zajmujemy miejsce Boga wszechmogocnego na tej ziemi ....

także tytuł słodkiego Chryrstusa na ziemi - patrz tu:
http://www.opoka.org.pl/biblioteka/W/WP ... uropy.html

[jj]

drugim nie stoi w sprzeczności.
Wielu wyszło antychrystów ale jest jeden szczególny.

Nie o to chodzi, Lash. Wiele pojedynczych osob - tak, ale nie organizacja, nie grupa...
A ten szczegolny, to tez pojedynczy czlowiek.

[chrześcijanin]

W historii ludzkości jest 7 dyspensacji

i jest tez kilka dyspenacjonizmow:

zrodlo: http://withchrist.org/mjs/dispensa.htm
oraz: http://withchrist.org/JND.pdf
osobiscie swoja pozycje okreslam jako Classic Pauline Dispensationalism

[chrześcijanin]

przeczytaj ten artykuł: http://forum.protestanci.info/viewtopic.php

ach: wielkie klamstwo, juz bylo prostowane, bojda na resorach - ale choc to smutne, ze takie bajki ktos rozpowszechnia mimo twardym obserwowalnym faktom, ze sam glosi otwarcie nauke Jezuitow i Dominikan - idac za ojcem KRK: Augustynem z Hippony, to jednak zrozumiale.

[chrześcijanin]

Eliasz napisał/a:
przeczytaj ten artykuł...
a tu polemika z tym artykulem Eliaszu - okreslajaca go jako wielkie klamstwo

za: http://www.raptureready.com/featured/ice/tt11.html
Cytat:
DARBY AND THE PRE-TRIB RAPTURE

Brethren writer, Roy A. Huebner claims and documents his belief that J.N. Darby first began to believe in the pre-trib rapture and develop his dispensational thinking while convalescing from a riding accident during December 1826 and January 1827.12 If this is true, then all of the origin-of-the-rapture-conspiracy-theories fall to the ground in a heap of speculative rubble. Darby would have at least a three-year jump on any who would have supposedly influenced his thought, making it impossible for all the "influence" theories to have any credibility.

Huebner provides clarification and evidence that Darby was not influenced by a fifteen-yea-old girl (Margaret Macdonald), Lacunza, Edward Irving, or the Irvingites. These are all said by the detractors of Darby and the pre-trib rapture to be bridges which led to Darby's thought. Instead, he demonstrates that Darby's understanding of the pre-trib rapture was the product of the development of his personal interactive thought with the text of Scripture as he, his friends, and dispensationalists have long contended.

Darby's pre-trib and dispensational thoughts, says Huebner, were developed from the following factors: 1) "he saw from Isaiah 32 that there was a different dispensation coming . . . that Israel and the Church were distinct."13 2) "During his convalescence JND learned that he ought daily to expect his Lord's return."14 3) "In 1827 JND understood the fall of the church. . . 'the ruin of the Church.'"15 4) Darby also was beginning to see a gap of time between the rapture and the second coming by 1827.16 5) Darby, himself, said in 1857 that he first started understanding things relating to the pre-trib Rapture "thirty years ago." "With that fixed point of reference, Jan. 31, 1827," declares Huebner, we can see that Darby "had already understood those truths upon which the pre-tribulation rapture hinges."17

German author Max S. Weremchuk has produced a major new biography on Darby entitled John Nelson Darby: A Biography.18 He agrees with Huebner's conclusions concerning the matter. "Having read MacPherson's book . . ." says Weremchuk, "I find it impossible to make a just comparison between what Miss MacDonald 'prophesied' and what Darby taught. It appears that the wish was the father of the idea."19

When reading Darby's earliest published essay on biblical prophecy (1829), it is clear that while it still has elements of historicism, it also reflects the fact that for Darby, the rapture was to be the church's focus and hope.20 Even in this earliest of essays, Darby expounds upon the rapture as the church's hope.21

SCHOLARS DO NOT ACCEPT THE BIG LIE

The various "rapture origin" theories espoused by opponents of pre-tribulationsm are not accepted as historically valid by scholars who have examined the evidence. The only ones who appear to have accepted these theories are those who already are opposed to the pre-trib rapture. A look at various scholars and historians reveals that they think, in varying degrees, that MacPherson has not proven his point. Most, if not all who are quoted below do not hold to the pre-trib rapture teaching. Ernest R. Sandeen declares,

This seems to be a groundless and pernicious charge. Neither Irving nor any member of the Albury group advocated any doctrine resembling the secret rapture. . . . Since the clear intention of this charge is to discredit the doctrine by attributing its origin to fanaticism rather than Scripture, there seems little ground for giving it any credence.22

Historian Timothy P. Weber's evaluation is a follows:

The pretribulation rapture was a neat solution to a thorny problem and historians are still trying to determine how or where Darby got it. . . .

A newer though still not totally convincing view contends that the doctrine initially appeared in a prophetic vision of Margaret Macdonald, . . .

Possibly, we may have to settle for Darby's own explanation. He claimed that the doctrine virtually jumped out of the pages of Scripture once he accepted and consistently maintained the distinction between Israel and the church.23

American historian Richard R. Reiter informs us that,

[Robert] Cameron probably traced this important but apparently erroneous view back to S. P. Tregelles, . . . Recently more detailed study on this view as the origin of pretribulationism appeared in works by Dave McPherson, . . . historian Ian S. Rennie . . . regarded McPherson's case as interesting but not conclusive.24

Posttribulationist William E. Bell asserts that,

It seems only fair, however, in the absence of eyewitnesses to settle the argument conclusively, that the benefit of the doubt should be given to Darby, and that the charge made by Tregelles be regarded as a possibility but with insufficient support to merit its acceptance. . . . On the whole, however, it seems that Darby is perhaps the most likely choice--with help from Tweedy. This conclusion is greatly strengthened by Darby's own claim to have arrived at the doctrine through his study of II Thessalonians 2:1-2.25

Pre-trib rapture opponent John Bray does not accept the MacPherson thesis either.

He [Darby] rejected those practices, and he already had his new view of the Lord coming FOR THE SAINTS (as contrasted to the later coming to the earth) which he had believed since 1827, . . . It was the coupling of this "70th week of Daniel" prophecy and its futuristic interpretation, with the teaching of the "secret rapture," that gave to us the completed "Pre-tribulation Secret Rapture" teaching as it has now been taught for many years. . . . makes it impossible for me to believe that Darby got his Pre-Tribulation Rapture teaching from Margaret MacDonald's vision in 1830. He was already a believer in it since 1827, as he plainly said.26

Huebner considers MacPherson's charges as "using slander that J. N. Darby took the (truth of the) pretribulation rapture from those very opposing, demon-inspired utterances."27 He goes on to conclude that MacPherson

did not profit by reading the utterances allegedly by Miss M. M. Instead of apprehending the plain import of her statements, as given by R. Norton, which has some affinity to the post-tribulation scheme and no real resemblance to the pretribulation rapture and dispensational truth, he has read into it what he appears so anxious to find.28

CONCLUSION

F. F. Bruce, who was part of the Brethren movement his entire life, but one who did not agree with the pre-trib rapture said the following when commenting on the validity of MacPherson's thesis:

Where did he [Darby] get it? The reviewer's answer would be that it was in the air in the 1820s and 1830s among eager students of unfulfilled prophecy, . . . direct dependence by Darby on Margaret Macdonald is unlikely.29

John Walvoord's assessment is likely close to the truth:

any careful student of Darby soon discovers that he did not get his eschatological views from men, but rather from his doctrine of the church as the body of Christ, a concept no one claims was revealed supernaturally to Irving or Macdonald. Darby's views undoubtedly were gradually formed, but they were theologically and biblically based rather than derived from Irving's pre-Pentecostal group.30

I challenge opponents of the pre-trib rapture to stick to a discussion of this matter based upon the Scriptures. While some have done this, many have not been so honest. To call the pre-trib position Satanic, as Rosenthal has done, does not help anyone in this discussion. Such rhetoric will only serve to cause greater polarization of the two views. However, when pre-trib opponents make false charges about the history of the pre-trib view we must respond. And respond we will in our next issue where we will present a clear pre-trib rapture statement from the fourth or fifth century. This pre-trib rapture statement ante-dates 1830 by almost 1,500 years and will certainly lead to at least a revision of those propagating The Big Lie.

ENDNOTES.

1 Marvin J. Rosenthal, "Is the Church in Matthew Chapter 24?" Zion's Fire (Nov-Dec 1994), p. 10. 2 Ibid.

3 John L. Bray, The Origin of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture Teaching (Lakeland, FL.: John L. Bray Ministry, 1982).

4 Dave MacPherson, The Unbelievable Pre-Trib Origin (Kansas City: Heart of America Bible Society, 1973). The Late Great Pre-Trib Rapture (Kansas City: Heart of America Bible Society, 1974). The Great Rapture Hoax (Fletcher, N.C.: New Puritan Library, 1983). Rapture? (Fletcher, N.C.: New Puritan Library, 1987). The Rapture Plot (Monticello, Utah: P.O.S.T. Inc., 1994).

5 Robert Van Kampen, The Sign (Wheaton, IL.: Crossway Books, 1992), pp. 445-47.

6 Marvin Rosenthal, The Pre-Wrath Rapture of the Church (Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1990), p. 53. 7 Ibid., pp. 53-54.

8 Some of the pre-trib responses include the following: R. A. Huebner, The Truth of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture Recovered (Millington, N.J.: Present Truth Publishers, 1976); Precious Truths Revived and Defended Through J. N. Darby, Vol. 1 (Morganville, N. J.: Present Truth Publishers, 1991). Gerald B. Stanton, Kept From The Hour, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1956). John F. Walvoord, The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1979). Robert L. Sumner, "Looking For The Blessed Horrible Holocaust!" A book review of The Late Great Pre-Trib Rapture in The Biblical Evangelist (Vol. 10, Num. 1; May, 1975); "Hope? Or Hoax?" The Biblical Evangelist (Vol. 18, Num. 3; Feb., 1984). Hal Lindsey, The Rapture: Truth Or Consequences (New York: Bantam Books, 1983). Charles Ryrie, What You Should Know About the Rapture (Chicago: Moody Press, 1981). Tim LaHaye, No Fear of the Storm: Why Christians will Escape All the Tribulation (Sisters, Ore.: Multnomah, 1992). Thomas D. Ice, "Why the Doctrine of the Pretribulational Rapture Did Not Begin with Margaret Macdonald," Bibliotheca Sacra 147 (1990), pp. 155-68; "The Origin of the Pre-Trib Rapture," Part I & II, Biblical Perspectives, vol. 2, no. 1, Jan./Feb. 1989 & vol. 2, no. 2, Mar./Apr. 1989; "Did J. N. Darby Believe in the Pretrib Rapture by 1827?" Dispensational Distinctives, vol. I, no. 6, Nov./Dec. 1991.

9 The following books are some of those which have the full text of Macdonald's utterance: MacPherson's Cover-Up, and Hoax. R. A. Huebner, The Truth of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture Recovered (Millington, N.J.: Present Truth Publishers, 1976), pp. 67-69. Hal Lindsey, The Rapture: Truth Or Consequences (New York: Bantam Books, 1983), pp. 169-172. William R. Kimball, The Rapture: A Question of Timing (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1985), pp. 44-47.

10 Ice, "Why the Doctrine of the Pretribulational Rapture Did Not Begin with Margaret Macdonald," pp. 158, 161.

11 Walvoord, The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation, p. 47.

12 R. A. Huebner, Precious Truths Revived and Defended Through J. N. Darby, Vol. 1 (Morganville, N. J.: Present Truth Publishers, 1991).

13 Ibid., p. 17. 14 Ibid., p. 19. 15 Ibid., p. 18. 16 Ibid., p. 23. 17 Ibid., p. 24.

18 Max S. Weremchuk, John Nelson Darby: A Biography (Neptune, N. J.: Loizeaux Brothers, 1992). 19 Ibid., p. 242.

20 J. N. Darby, "Reflections upon the Prophetic Inquiry and the Views Advanced in it" The Collected Writings of J. N. Darby, vol. 2 (Winschoten, Netherlands: H. L. Heijkoop, reprint 1971), pp. 1-31.

21 Ibid., pp. 16-18, 25, 30.

22 Ernest R. Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism: British and American Millenarianism 1800-1930 (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1970), p. 64.

23 Timothy P. Weber, Living In The Shadow Of The Second Coming: American Premillennialism 1875-1982 (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1983), pp. 21-22.

24 Richard R. Reiter, The Rapture: Pre-, Mid-, or Post-Tribulational? (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publication, 1984), p. 236.

25 William E. Bell, A Critical Evaluation of the Pretribulation Rapture Doctrine in Christian Eschatology (Ph.D. diss., New York University, 1967), pp. 60-61, 64-65.

26 Bray, Ibid., pp. 24-25, 28 27 Huebner, p. 13. 28 Ibid., p. 67.

29 F. F. Bruce, Review of The Unbelievable Pre-Trib Origin in The Evangelical Quarterly, (Vol. XLVII, No. 1; Jan-Mar, 1975), p. 58.

30 Walvoord, p. 47.

[chrześcijanin]

i kolejny material jako polemika z tekstem od Eliasza:
Third, Brethren writer, Roy A. Huebner claims and documents his belief that J. N. Darby first began to believe in the pre-trib rapture and develop his dispensational thinking while convalescing from a riding accident during December 1826 and January 1827. (R. A. Huebner, Precious Truths Revived and Defended Through J. N. Darby, Vol. 1 [Present Truth Publishers, 1991].) If this is true, and there is every reason to believe that it is, then all of the origin-of-the-rapture-conspiracy-theories fall to the ground in a heap of speculative rubble. Darby would have at least a three-year jump on any who would have supposedly influenced his thought, making it impossible for all the influence theories to have any credibility.
R.A.Huebner provides clarification and evidence that Darby was not influenced by Margaret Macdonald, Lacunza, Edward Irving, or any of the Irvingites. These are all said by the detractors of Darby and the pre-trib rapture to be bridges that led to Darby's thought. Instead, Huebner demonstrates that Darbys understanding of the pre-trib rapture was the product of the development of his personal interactive thought with the text of Scripture as he, his friends, and dispensationalists have long contended.

Darbys pre-trib and dispensational thoughts, says Huebner, were developed from the following factors: 1) he saw from Isaiah 32 that there was a different dispensation coming . . . that Israel and the Church were distinct (Precious Truths, p. 17).
2) During his convalescence JND learned that he ought daily to expect his Lords return. (Precious Truths, p. 19).
3) In 1827 JND understood the fall of the church. . . the ruin of the Church (Precious Truths, p. 18).
4) Darby also was beginning to see a gap of time between the rapture and the second coming by 1827 (Precious Truths, p. 23).
5) Darby, himself, said in 1857 that he first started understanding things relating to the pre-trib Rapture thirty years ago.
With that fixed point of reference, Jan. 31, 1827, declares Huebner, we can see that Darby had already understood those truths upon which the pre-tribulation rapture hinges (Precious Truths, p. 24).

German author Max S. Weremchuk has produced a major new biography on Darby entitled John Nelson Darby: A Biography (Loizeaux Brothers, 1992). He agrees with Huebners conclusions concerning the matter.
Having read MacPhersons book . . . says Weremchuk, I find it impossible to make a just comparison between what Miss MacDonald 'prophesied' and what Darby taught.
It appears that the wish was the father of the idea (Weremchuk, Darby, p. 242).

When reading Darbys earliest published essay on biblical prophecy (1829), it is clear that while it still has elements of historicism, it also reflects the fact that for Darby, the rapture was to be the churchs focus and hope.
Even in this earliest of essays, Darby expounds upon the rapture as the churchs hope.

Pre-Darby Raptures

In addition to the above points, there have been at least three pre-Darby rapture discoveries in the last decade.
Evidence of pretribulationism surfaces during the early medieval period in a sermon some attribute to Ephraem the Syrian entitled Sermon on The Last Times, The Antichrist, and The End of the World.
The sermon was written some time between the fourth and sixth century. The rapture statement reads as follows:
Why therefore do we not reject every care of earthly actions and prepare ourselves for the meeting of the Lord Christ, so that he may draw us from the confusion, which overwhelms all the world? . . . For all the saints and elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins.

This statement evidences a clear belief that all Christians will escape the tribulation through a gathering to the Lord.
How else can this be understood other than as pretribulational?
The later second coming of Christ to the earth with the saints is mentioned at the end of the sermon.

Francis Gumerlock, an anti-pretribulationist, claims that someone named Brother Dolcino taught a form of the pre-trib rapture in 1304.
The reason that Gumerlock believes that Brother Dolcino and the Apostolic Brethren taught pretribulationism is found the following statement:

Again, [Dolcino believed and preached and taught] that within those three years Dolcino himself and his followers will preach the coming of the Antichrist. And that the Antichrist was coming into this world within the bounds of the said three and a half years; and after he had come, then he [Dolcino] and his followers would be transferred into Paradise, in which are Enoch and Elijah. And in this way they will be preserved unharmed from the persecution of Antichrist. And that then Enoch and Elijah themselves would descend on the earth for the purpose of preaching [against] Antichrist. Then they would be killed by him or by his servants, and thus Antichrist would reign for a long time. But when the Antichrist is dead, Dolcino himself, who then would be the holy pope, and his perserved followers, will descend on the earth, and will preach the right faith of Christ to all, and will convert those who will be living then to the true faith of Jesus Christ.
(Gumerlocks translation of the Latin text in Francis Gumerlock, A Rapture Citation in the Fourteenth Century, Bibliotheca Sacra (July-Sept. 2002), pp. 354-55.)

Gumerlock clearly believes that this is a pretrib rapture statement as he concludes:

Two things are fairly certain from The History of Brother Dolcino.
First, Dolcino and the Apostolic Brethren believed that the purpose of the rapture was related to the escape of the saints from the end-time tribulation and persecution of the Antichrist.
Second, Dolcino and the Apostolic Brethren believed that there would be a significant gap of time between the rapture of the saints to paradise and their subsequent descent to earth. Because of this The History of Brother Dolcino stands as yet another literary witness for the existence of pretribulationism before the nineteenth century.
As such, it challenges evangelicals to reevaluate their thinking about the history of the pretribulational rapture, especially those views that place the origin of the teaching or its initial recovery within the last two hundred years.
For this fourteenth-century text demonstrates that there were some in the Middle Ages who held a theology of the rapture that includes basic elements in pretribulationalism. (A Rapture Citation, p. 362)

Frank Marotta believes that Thomas Collier in 1674 makes reference to a pretribulational rapture, but rejects the view, (Frank Marotta, Morgan Edwards: An Eighteenth Century Pretribulationist (Present Truth Publishers, 1995), pp. 10-12.) thus showing his awareness that such a view was being taught. One could not have objected to something that did not exist.

Perhaps the clearest reference to a pretrib rapture before Darby comes from Baptist Morgan Edwards (founder of Brown University) in 1742-44 who saw a distinct rapture three and a half years before the start of the millennium. During his student days at Bristol Baptist Seminary in England (1742-44), Morgan Edwards wrote an essay for eschatology class on his views of Bible prophecy. This essay was later published in Philadelphia (1788) under the following title: Two Academical Exercises on Subjects Bearing the following Titles; Millennium, Last-Novelties. The term in the title "Last-Novelties" refers to what we would call today the eternal state; "novelties" refers to the new conditions of the future new heavens and new earth, not that he had a novel view of the Bible.
Upon reading the 56-page work, it is evident that Edwards published it with only minor changes from his student days. Thus, it represents a view that he had developed by the early 1740s.
Thus, we can date Edwards pretribulationism as originating in the early 1740s. The pretribulationism of Morgan Edwards can be see in the following statement from his book:

II. The distance between the first and second resurrection will be somewhat more than a thousand years.
I say, somewhat more, because the dead saints will be raised, and the living changed at Christ's "appearing in the air" (I Thes. iv. 17); and this will be about three years and a half before the millennium, as we shall see hereafter: but will he and they abide in the air all that time? No: they will ascend to paradise, or to some one of those many "mansions in the father's house" (John xiv. 2), and so disappear during the foresaid period of time. The design of this retreat and disappearing will be to judge the risen and changed saints; for "now the time is come that judgment must begin," and that will be "at the house of God" (I Pet. iv. 17) . . . (p. 7; emphasis added; the spelling of all Edwards quotes have been modernized)

What has Edwards said? Note the following:

He believes that at least 1,003.5 years will transpire between resurrections.

He associates the first resurrection with the rapture in 1 Thessalonians 4:17, occurring at least 3.5 years before the start of the millennium (i.e., at least 3.5 years before the second coming of Christ at the start of the millennium).

He associates the meeting of believers with Christ in the air and returning to the Father's house with John 14:2, as do modern pretribulationists.

He sees believers disappearing during the time of the tribulation, which he goes on to describe in the rest of the section from which the rapture statement is taken.

He, like modern pretribulationists, links the time in heaven, during the tribulation, with the "bema" judgment of believers.

It is clear that Edwards believed in a two-staged return of Christ at least 85 years before Darby.
Edwards pre-Darby statement is something that MacPherson cannot answer.
I am not claiming that Darby was influenced by Morgan Edwards.

Conclusion

F.F. Bruce's conclusion as to where Darby got the doctrine of the pretrib rapture appears to be correct. It was in the air in the 1820s and 1830s among eager students of unfulfilled prophecy, . . . direct dependence by Darby on Margaret Macdonald is unlikely. (F. F. Bruce, Review of The Unbelievable Pre-Trib Origin in The Evangelical Quarterly, (Jan-Mar, 1975), p. 58.) Dave MacPherson has failed to demonstrate that Macdonald's prophecy contains latent rapture ideas, nor has he linked Darby to her influence with clear, historical evidence. This is why the doctrine of the pretribulational rapture did not begin with Margaret Macdonald. Perhaps Darby's training at Dublin accounts for many of his views, especially his views of the nature of the church. Walvoord concludes, any careful student of Darby soon discovers that he did not get his eschatological views from men, but rather from his doctrine of the church as the body of Christ, a concept no one claims was revealed supernaturally to Irving or Macdonald. Darby's views undoubtedly were gradually formed, but they were theologically and biblically based rather than derived from Irving's pre-Pentecostal group. (Walvoord, The Blessed Hope and the Tribulation, p. 47.) By Tommy Ice
za:
http://www.raptureready.com/who/Dave_MacPherson.html

[chrześcijanin]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

za: http://www.thekkel.com/rapture.html
Cytat:
By Darby’s own testimony, his ideas came from the Bible, particularly his understanding of the distinctiveness of the church in 1826-1828). His belief that the rapture would be a considerable time before the Second Coming was developed before 1930 and the concept of parenthesis between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks of Daniel around 1830.

Historian Roy A Huebner documents the fact that J.N. Darby first began to believe in the pre-tribulation rapture and develop his dispensational thinking while Convalescing from a riding accident during December 1826-and January 1827.

If this is true, then all of the origins of the rapture conspiracy theories fall to the ground in a heap of speculative rubble. Huebner provides clarification and evidence that Margaret MacDonald, Lacunza, Edward Irving, or the Irvngites did not influence Darby. In fact, none of these even taught any form of pre-tribulationism. These are all said by the detractions of Darby and the pre-tribulation rapture to be bridges, which led to Darby’s thought.
zrodlo: http://www.thekkel.com/rapture.html

oraz:
http://www.believersweb.org/view.cfm?ID=1142
http://www.believersweb.org/view.cfm?ID=1142
http://www.according2prophecy.org/macphers.html

Historical Deficiencies

MacPherson professes to be a historian (p. 233). His work is lacking in historical method. Consider his claim that William Kelly, as editor of Darby's Collected Writings, manipulated them. Regarding Darby's Notes on Revelation (1839) MacPherson writes:

We've previously noted that a chart (listing no artist or date) accompanying this work shows the church in heaven no later than Revelation 4 -additional manipulation and further contradiction of Darby's Revelation 12 basis! (p. 152)

I have inspected a xeroxed copy of the 1839 edition of this work published by Central Tract Depot, London. The chart in question is there and shows the church in heaven in Revelation chapter 4! MacPherson's speculation is without foundation. A true historian would inspect the original source materials before making the claims that MacPherson does. He is governed by an agenda, not a desire for unbiased historical research.

Here are a few of the many deficiencies that I found in The Rapture Plot:

1. MacPherson states that the key symbol of the pretribulation rapture for Margaret Macdonald is the catching up of the two witnesses of Revelation 11 (p. 47-49). If this is true, one wonders if MacPherson has ever read Revelation 11. Before the witnesses are caught up (verse 12), the beast makes war with them and kills them (verse 7). Thus the two witnesses go through tribulation before they are killed, raised and caught up. So if Macdonald's teaching is based on this passage, she is certainly posttribulational! Actually, there is no doubt that the woman who said, "The trial of the Church is from Antichrist" was posttribulational.

Morgan Edwards and the Rapture

2. Recently it has come to light that the 18th century Baptist Morgan Edwards held to a pretribulation rapture (see Pre-Trib Perspectives Sept/Oct 1995). If MacPherson were to regard Morgan Edwards as pretribulational, then both his Macdonald "cover-up" and his Kelly "plot" would be for naught. In The Rapture Plot he recklessly labels Edwards a posttribulational historicist. He writes: ". . . it's obvious that Edwards interpreted these 1260 days [of Revelation 11] as years" (p. 266). This is a blatant falsehood. Edwards wrote in his Two Academical Exercises:

When these witnesses will appear is hard to say; for though their time of prophesying in saccloth [sic] is 1260 days or three years and a half (allowing thirty days to a month) yet they may preach out of sackcloth long before; for the 1260 days refer only to the time that the holy city and the outer court of the temple shall be trodden under the foot of the Gentiles (or Antichrist and his army) viz. 42 months, which make exactly 1260 d

ays, allowing 30 to a month (Rev xi.2). . ." (p. 19)

It is clear from the above that Edwards does not believe the two witnesses had appeared yet. The preaching in sackcloth are 1260 literal days; if they were years (clearly they are not from the context) then they had not as yet begun, which is unlike historicism in any form. The "prophesying out of sackcloth" that Edwards speculates the two witnesses will perform is before Revelation 11:2. Edwards is futurist and literal in his consideration of prophetic time in Revelation 12:7-11 (p. , Daniel 8:14 (p. 20), Daniel 12:12,13 (p. 21), Revelation 12:14 (p. 23), and Daniel 12:11 (p. 23).

3. MacPherson writes on p. 267 of The Rapture Plot:

Edwards' basis for holding to a rapture three and a half years before the second advent (and a future millennium) may well have been the Revelation 11 witnesses on whom he focused. This chapter has a period of three and a half days (verses 9, 11) that historicism can view as three and a half years. Since the spirits of these dead witnesses conceivably go to be with Christ during the same days, days preceding the final advent-historicist Edwards could see in this symbol a rapture three and a half years before the same advent.

Compare this with Morgan Edwards:

Another event previous to the Millennium will be the appearing of the son of man in the clouds, coming to raise the dead saints and change the living, and to catch them up to himself, and then withdrawing with them, as observed before. This event will come to pass when Antichrist be arrived at Jerusalem in his conquest of the world; and about three years and a half before his killing the witnesses and assumption of godhead. (Edwards, p. 21)

MacPherson's speculation is without foundation; Edwards distinguishes the saints caught up from the two witnesses, both as to time (the saints caught up three years and a half before the witnesses killed) and identity. Edwards identifies the witnesses as Elijah and the Apostle John (Edwards, pp. 17-19); MacPherson fails to inform his readers of this fact. The catching up of the witnesses is after the three and a half days (verse 12), not before. MacPherson also fails to inform his readers of Morgan Edwards linking the rapture to I Peter 4:17, "For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God" (Edwards, p. 7)

4. MacPherson concludes his section on Morgan Edwards by writing:

Edwards' scheme of a rapture three and a half years before the end of a 1260-year tribulation has the same tiny gap a futurist would have if he were to teach a rapture three and a half days before the end of a 1260-day tribulation! Since such a futurist view would be seen as a posttrib view, Edwards (who had the same small percentage) should be classified as a historicist posttrib! p. 268)

There is a footnote attached which states:

Edwards saw a rapture at the extreme end of the tribulation. The mathematics works out as follows: 3.5 years/1260 years = 0.0027 or 0.27% remaining. That means 99.73% of the tribulation was already past before the rapture. Hardly a pretrib rapture! (p. 268)

As already shown, Edwards did not teach anything like a 1260 year tribulation. Nor was he a historicist. Nor was he "posttrib." But let us apply the same mathematics to some of his alleged pretribulationists. First, consider John Hooper, a contributor to The Morning Watch. MacPherson speaks of "Hooper's pretrib rapture" (p. 200). He also writes of Hooper as "a historicist who saw the final advent in about 1868, Hooper had 37 remaining years where he could fit in between Revelation 16 and Revelation 19..." (p. 200). Let us perform a calculation: 37 years/1260 years = 0.0294 or 2.94% remaining. That means at least 97.06% of the tribulation was already past before the rapture (assuming Christ could come immediately). Hardly a pretribulational rapture! Perhaps Dave MacPherson will tell us at what number between 97.06% and 99.73% complete we transition from pretribulational to posttribulational. Or perhaps MacPherson could admit Hooper as posttribulational. Next, let us consider the woman whom MacPherson labels as the first pretribulationist: Margaret Macdonald. He wrote on p. 49 of The Great Rapture Hoax:

Margaret, however, had

been influenced by historicism and the year-day theory involving 1260 years. . . If only one-tenth of 1260 years remained unfulfilled in her view, she could still believe in a future Antichrist; he would have a total of 126 years in which to do his dirty work.

MacPherson is gracious in allowing 126 years remaining in Margaret's mind. Especially since she identified Robert Owen, a contemporary, as the Antichrist (The Rapture Plot, p. 53). But applying the same mathematical formula that would mean 90% of the tribulation was complete for her! Applying the same method MacPherson does to Morgan Edwards would make her "hardly pretrib!"

5. The importance MacPherson places on The Rapture Plot reveals his spiritual condition. He writes on p. 234:

The real test is ahead. If pretrib promoters ignore or twist this book's documentation, and if their only bottom line is a continuing flow of funds, then I won't be surprised if God views them collectively as an "Achan" (Josh. 7) and allows a national or even international money collapse!

This statement is incredible. Ignoring The Rapture Plot leads to an international money collapse! This extreme notion indicates the mentality under which MacPherson operates.

It is significant that MacPherson is the lone "historian" who has argued a connection between Macdonald and Darby. Considering that there have been numerous historical examinations of both the Irvingites and the Brethren, yet MacPherson stands alone in exposing the "plot," is rather a testimony to polemical bias, not the facts. Those anti-pretribulationists who have adopted MacPherson's revision have done so merely on the basis of his word, not as a result of original research.

Conclusion

Dave MacPherson's The Rapture Plot is a defective work which distorts history. There is no plot. It misrepresents godly men such as Darby and Kelly. It fails to prove the Irvingites were pretribulational in the 1830s. It is completely inaccurate concerning Morgan Edwards' teaching. The Rapture Plot has the same character as MacPherson's previous works. Christians who desire to feed their souls on truth would be well advised to avoid his works. W

Endnotes

1R.A. Huebner, The Truth of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture Recovered (Millington, NJ: Present Truth Publishers, 1976). Huebner, Precious Truths Revived and Defended Through J.N. Darby, Vol. 1 (Morganville, NJ: Present Truth Publishers, 1991). Thomas Ice, "Why the Doctrine of the Pretribulational Rapture Did Not Begin with Margaret Macdonald," Bibliotheca Sacra (Vol. 147; April-June 1990), pp. 155-68. Gerald Stanton, Kept From The Hour, 4th. edition, (Miami Springs, FL: Schoettle Publishing, 1991).

2Columba Graham Flegg, 'Gathered Under Apostles' A Study of the Catholic Apostolic Church (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992), p. 436
http://www.according2prophecy.org/macphers.html


Jak widac z podanych zestawien faktow - bajka Eliasza to tylko bajka - co prawda opowiedzial ja mu ktos zlosliwy, ale poniewaz Eliasz sam ja rozpowszechnia bezkrytycznie - czyni to na wlasna odpowiedzialnosc - bo przy zachowaniu nalezytej starannosci moze zweryfikowac i sfalsyfikowac te bojdy

[tommylis]

a czy jest sens wklejania calych artykulow i to jeszcze w jezyku ang?
pozdr

[chrześcijanin]

jeszcze w jezyku ang

Akurat glowny polemista Eliasz swietnie angielski zna - i to dla niego jako odbiorcy i przedstawiciela zwolennikow wielkiego klamstwa. Poza wklejeniem miales streszczenie po polsku = a z kolei diagram ze strzalkami i nazwiskami i datami sam sie przez sie rozumie. Watts jako ojciec Scofieldianskiego Dyspensacjonizmu zyl w latach 16... (17 wiek) na tyle wczesnie by bylo widac ze rewelacje Eliasza to zwykla choc wredna bajeczka.

Dla Ciebie, po polsku (tlumaczenie z tzw. Biblii CIScofielda):

SIEDEM WIEKÓW



C. I. Scofield:


Pismo Święte rozdziela czas. Pod pojęciem "czas" rozumiemy tu cały okres od stworzenia Adama aż do “nowego nieba i nowej ziemi” o którym czytamy w Księdze Objawienia 21:1. Czas ten jest dzielony na siedem różnej długości okresów, nazywanych zwyczajowo “szafarstwami” (Bożymi) (Efezjan 1:10; 3:2), choć te okresy nazywane są również “wiekami” (List do Efezjan 2:7) i “dniami” – jak: “dzień Pański”, itd.

Okresy te rozgraniczone są w Piśmie Świętym jakimiś zasadniczymi zmianami w Bożych metodach postępowania z ludzkością, bądź też częścią ludzkości, pod względem dwóch kwestii: grzechu i ludzkiej odpowiedzialności. Każdy z okresów może być uważany za nowy jakby sprawdzian człowieka w jego naturze i każdy kończy się sądem – zaznaczającym jego zupełny upadek.

Pięć szafarstw, lub inaczej mówiąc: "wieków", zostało już zakończonych, w chwili gdy te słowa są pisane trwa szóste szafarstwo, i prawdopodobnie zmierza już do swojego końca. Po nim nastąpi siódme, ostatnie – Milenium (Tysiącletnie Królestwo).



1. WIEK NIEWINNOŚCI

To szafarstwo rozciąga się od stworzenia Adama (1 Mojżeszowa 2:7), aż do jego upadku w grzech. Adam, stworzony niewinnym oraz nieświadomym dobra i zła, został umieszczony w ogrodzie Eden wraz ze swoją żoną Ewą i postawiony wobec odpowiedzialności wstrzymania się od spożycia owocu z drzewa poznania dobra i zła. Wiek Niewinności dał w rezultacie pierwszy a zarazem, w swoich dalekosiężnych skutkach, najbardziej katastrofalny upadek człowieka, i został zamknięty sądem – “Odprawił więc Bóg człowieka”. Patrz 1 Księga Mojżeszowa 1:26; 2:16,17; 3:6; 3:22-24.



2. WIEK SUMIENIA

Przez swój upadek, Adam i Ewa przyswoili sobie znajomość dobra i zła, i tę znajomość przenieśli na całą ludzkość. Dało to sumieniu każdego człowieka podstawę do prawidłowego moralnego osądu i od tego czasu, rasa ludzka została poddana tej mierze odpowiedzialności - aby czynić dobro, a wystrzegać się zła. Rezultatem działania człowieka w trakcie Wieku Sumienia było to, że “wszelkie ciało splugawiło swoją drogę na ziemi”, oraz to że “wielka była złość człowieka na ziemi, a każdym zamysłem jego serca było nieprzerwane czynienie zła”. Bóg zakończył drugi sprawdzian natury człowieka sądem – Potopem. Patrz Księga Rodzaju 3:7,22; 6:5,11,12; 7:11,12, 23.



3. WIEK RZĄDÓW

Z przerażającego sądu, jakim był Potop, Bóg uratował osiem osób, którym to, po tym gdy wody opadły, podarował On oczyszczoną Ziemię oraz znaczną moc, niezbędną do zarządzania nią. To właśnie Noe i jego potomkowie byli odpowiedzialni czynić. Okres Ludzkich Rządów doprowadził, na równinie Sinear, do bezbożnej próby uniezależnienia się od Boga i został zamknięty sądem – Pomieszaniem Języków. Patrz Księga Rodzaju 9:1,2; 11:1-4; 11:5-4.



4. WIEK OBIETNIC

Spośród rozproszonych potomków budowniczych wieży Babel, Bóg powołuje teraz jednego człowieka – Abrama, z którym zawiera przymierze. Niektóre z obietnic danych Abramowi i jego potomkom były doskonale wspaniałomyślne i bezwarunkowe. Te albo zostały, albo dopiero zostaną w sposób literalny wypełnione. Inne obietnice były warunkowe i ich wypełnienie było uzależnione od wiary i posłuszeństwa Izraelitów. Każdy z tych warunków został naruszony, dlatego Wiek Obietnic zakończył się całkowitym upadkiem Izraela i został zamknięty sądem – Egipską Niewolą.

1 Księga Mojżeszowa, którą otwierają słowa “Na początku Bóg stworzył”, zamyka się słowami, “w trumnie w Egipcie”. Patrz 1 Księga Mojżeszowa 12:1-3; 15:5; 26:3; 28:12,13; 13:14-17; 2 Mojżeszowa 1:13-14.



5. WIEK ZAKONU

Ponownie łaska Boża przyszła z pomocą bezradnemu człowiekowi i wybawiła wybrany lud z ręki oprawcy. Na pustkowiu, na górze Synaj zaoferował On człowiekowi Przymierze Prawa. Zamiast pokornie błagać o kontynuowanie związku opierającego się na łasce, Izraelici przypuszczalnie odpowiedzieli: “Wszystko, co Jahweh rzekł, my uczynimy.” Historia Izraela na pustkowiu i w Ziemi Kanaan, jest jednym długim zapisem rażącego, nieustannego naruszania Prawa. W końcu, po wielokrotnych ostrzeżeniach Bóg zakończył sprawdzian człowieka podległego Prawu sądem - najpierw Izrael, a następnie Juda, zostali uprowadzeni ze swojej Ziemi i rozproszeni po świecie. Rozproszenie to trwa po dziś dzień. Niewielka resztka prowadzona przez Ezdrasza i Nehemiasza powróciła, i z niej to, po pewnym czasie narodził się Chrystus: “Zrodzony z kobiety – człowiek podległy zakonowi.” Jego to zarówno Żydzi, jak i Poganie, wspólnie sprzysięgli się ukrzyżować. Patrz 2 Księga Mojżeszowa 19:1-8; List do Rzymian 10:5; List do Galacjan 3:10; List do Rzymian 3:19,20; 2 Księga Królewska 17:1-18; 25:1-11; Dzieje Apostolskie 2:22-23; 7:51,52.



6. WIEK ŁASKI

Doskonała ofiara z doskonałego Bożego Baranka, czyli przebłagalna śmierć Pana Jezusa Chrystusa, Który złożył samego siebie jako okup za wielu aby o tym świadczono we właściwym czasie, rozpoczęła Wiek Łaski. Łaska oznacza niezasłużoną przychylność Boga wobec winnego, godnego wiecznego potępienia grzesznika. Łaska oznacza że Bóg OBDARZA usprawiedliwieniem. W wieku zakonu Bóg WYMAGAŁ sprawiedliwości od człowieka.

Zbawienie doskonałe i wieczne, czyli uratowanie od należnej kary piekła wiecznego, jest w wieku łaski oferowane Izraelitom i innym narodom pod jedynym warunkiem: wiary w Pana Jezusa Chrystusa.

Odpowiedział Jezus i rzekł im: To jest dzieło Boże: abyście wierzyli w Tego, którego On posłał. Jana 6:29.

Zaprawdę, zaprawdę powiadam wam: Kto we mnie wierzy, ma życie wieczne. Jana 6:47.

Zaprawdę, zaprawdę powiadam wam: Kto słowa Mego słucha i wierzy Temu, który mnie posłał, ma życie wieczne i nie przyjdzie na sąd, ale przeszedł z śmierci do życia. Jana 5:24.

Owce Moje głosu Mojego słuchają, a Ja je znam i idą za Mną; A ja życie wieczne daję im i nie zginą na wieki, ani ich nikt nie wydrze z ręki Mojej. Jana 10:27-28.

Albowiem łaską jesteście zbawieni przez wiarę, i to nie jest z was, dar to Boży jest; Nie z uczynków, aby się ktoś nie chlubił. Efezjan 2:8-9.

Przepowiedzianym rezultatem tego wieku łaski, jest sąd nad niewierzącym światem, i odstępczym chrześcijaństwem. Przeczytajmy: Objawienie Jana 3:15,16; Ewangelia Łukasza 18:8; 17:26,30; 2 List do Tesaloniczan 2:7-12.

Pierwszym wydarzeniem przy końcu szfarstwa łaski będzie zstąpienie Pana Jezusa Chrystusa z nieba, kiedy święci, którzy zasnęli w Panu Jezusie powstaną spośród umarłych, i wtedy wierzącymi którzy będą jeszcze żyć, razem z nimi zostaną pochwyceni jak uczy Pismo: “w obłokach naprzeciwko Panu na powietrze, a tak zawsze z Panem będziemy”. 1 List do Tesaloniczan 4:16,17. Potem nastąpi okres zwany “Wielkim Uciskiem”. O czym czytamy między innymi w: Ewangelii Mateusza 24: 21, 22; Sofoniasza 1:15-18; Daniela 12:1; Jeremiasza 30;5-7, i w wielu innych.

Następnie Pan Jezus Chrystus powróci na Ziemię w wielkiej mocy i w chwale, i nastąpi sąd, który rozpocznie siódme i ostatnie szafarstwo: wiek tysiącletniego królestwa. Możemy o tym przeczytać w Ewangelii Mateusza 24:29,30; 25:41,46, i wielu innych miejscach.



7. WIEK TYSIĄCLETNIEGO KRÓLESTWA

Po oczyszczającym sądzie, który zakończy się osobistym powrotem Pana Jezusa Chrystusa na Ziemię, Król Królów i Pan Panów - Chrystus Jezus będzie sprawował rządy nad odnowionym Izraelem i nad całą Ziemią przez tysiąc lat. Ten okres 1000 lat powszechnie nazywany jest Tysiącletnim Królestwem albo Millenium. Tron Pana Jezusa Chrystusa będzie w tym szafarstwie w Jerozolimie, a wszyscy święci, łącznie z uratowanymi w Wieku Łaski, czyli Zgromadzeniem, połączą się z Panem Jezusem Chrystusem w Jego chwale. Możemy o tym przeczytać w wielu miejscach, między innymi w: Dziejach Apostolskich 15:14-17; Księdze Izajasza 2:1-4; Objawieniu Jana 19:11-21;20:1-6; Księdze Izajasza 11, i wielu innych.

Ale, kiedy szatan zostanie na krotki czas uwolniony, po upływie 1000 lat, znowu odnajdzie ludzkie serca skłonne do złego, jak zawsze, i łatwo zgromadzi narody do bitwy przeciwko Panu Jezusowi Chrystusowi i Jego świętym, i to ostatnie szafarstwo, zwane Wiekiem Tysiącletniego Królestwa, tak jak wszystkie wcześniejsze, zakończone zostanie sądem. Postawiony zostanie “Wielki Biały Tron”, a potem nadejdzie “nowe niebo i nowa ziemia” – skończy się czas i zacznie się wieczność. Możemy o tym przeczytać w: Objawieniu Jana 20:3,7-15; 21 i 22.
zrodlo: http://chrzescijanie.info/cisszafarstwaTJ.htm

na tej stronie sa jeszcze 2 rozdzialy z 12 oryginalnie dodawanych do Biblii Scofielda:
http://chrzescijanie.info/cis2przyjsciaChrystusaTJ.htm
http://chrzescijanie.info/ciszgromadzenieiizraelTJ.htm
zapraszam do lektury

[KAAN]

Dzięki chrześcijaninie że podałeś tyle materiałów, dodam może tylko drobne słowo, dlaczego nauka o "zarządzaniu czasami" - dyspensacjonalizm, została wyeksponowana w pełni przez Darby'ego . Chodzi zwyczajnie o rozleglą wiedzę historyczną i studia biblijne w wyniku których pewne sprawy mogły być widoczne. Do czasów Darby'ego nie było zgromadzonej odpowiedniej wiedzy historycznej która pokazałaby jak Bóg działa w historii, pomimo tego że Biblia mówi o wszystkim co wystarcza do dostrzeżenia okresów zarządzania Bożego, to jednak dopiero nagromadzenie wiedzy w jednym miejscu i systematyczne studium Biblii (szczególnie!) doprowadziły do dostrzeżenia tych prawd. Slowo Boże mówi że w czasach ostatecznych wzrośnie poznanie, że roztropni bedą mieli wiedzę i to proroctwo wypełniło się w ruchu ewangelicznym w szególności w braciach plymuckich.

Dan 12:3 Lecz roztropni jaśnieć będą jak jasność na sklepieniu niebieskim, a ci, którzy wielu wiodą do sprawiedliwości, jak gwiazdy na wieki wieczne.
4 Ale ty, Danielu, zamknij te słowa i zapieczętuj księgę aż do czasu ostatecznego! Wielu będzie to badać i wzrośnie poznanie.

[Lash]

Dla mnie ilość tych dyspensacji jest trochę naciągana.... - musi byc 7 - dem
- Niewinność - OK
- Sumienie - OK
- Rządy i obietniece to jedno
- Prawo OK
- Łaska Ok
- 1000 letnie to zalerzy od stosunku do millenium

[KAAN]

Dla mnie ilość tych dyspensacji jest trochę naciągana.... - musi byc 7 - dem

Musi? Po prostu jest siedem. Możliwe ze Bóg tak to ustanowił żeby było siedem, jak sześć dzni stworzenia i 1 odpoczynku = 7, jak 70x7 tygodni w Danielu... Wbrew opinii wielu to nie numerologia, ale Boże postanowienie, jeden z elementów wskazujących że Bóg rządzi historią i całym stworzeniem.

- Niewinność - OK
- Sumienie - OK
- Rządy i obietniece to jedno

Nie jest jedno, rządy ludzkiego panowania są czymś innym niż czasy obietnicy.

- Prawo OK
- Łaska Ok
- 1000 letnie to zalerzy od stosunku do millenium

Drogi Lashu, istnienie czegoś nie zalezy od stosunku... , ale od woli Bożej. Jest fakt Milenium objawiony w Słowie, ma on swój szczególny kształt w historii świata, różni się znacząco od czasu Kościoła, czyli czasu łaski, dlatego musi być traktowany osobno. To ze jest siedem okresów w historii świata wskazuje na doskonały plan Boży, doskonały plan zbawienia.

[Lash]

Dla mnie ilość tych dyspensacji jest trochę naciągana.... - musi byc 7 - dem

Musi? Po prostu jest siedem. Możliwe ze Bóg tak to ustanowił żeby było siedem, jak sześć dzni stworzenia i 1 odpoczynku = 7, jak 70x7 tygodni w Danielu... Wbrew opinii wielu to nie numerologia, ale Boże postanowienie, jeden z elementów wskazujących że Bóg rządzi historią i całym stworzeniem.

Własnie o tym mówie że stosuje sie tu analogie choc jej byc nie musi.

- Niewinność - OK
- Sumienie - OK
- Rządy i obietniece to jedno

Nie jest jedno, rządy ludzkiego panowania są czymś innym niż czasy obietnicy.

Dla mnie to podział o tyle nie spójny ze nie opiera się o JEDEN @sposób@ podziału.
Np Gdy dzielimy na zasadzie PRAWA to mamy
- Adam - 1 przykzanie
- Kain do Abrahama - Sumienie
- Abraham do Mojżesza - Kilka Praw + Sumienie
- Mojzesz - Prawo
- Jezus - miłosc

W tym proponowanym przez was podziale mieszają się rózne porządki.
rządy i obietnice i prawo.
Dla mnie to trochę naciągane.

- Prawo OK
- Łaska Ok
- 1000 letnie to zalerzy od stosunku do millenium

Drogi Lashu, istnienie czegoś nie zalezy od stosunku... , ale od woli Bożej. Jest fakt Milenium objawiony w Słowie, ma on swój szczególny kształt w historii świata, różni się znacząco od czasu Kościoła, czyli czasu łaski, dlatego musi być traktowany osobno. To ze jest siedem okresów w historii świata wskazuje na doskonały plan Boży, doskonały plan zbawienia.

O milenium masz tylko jedno zdanie. w Księdze Najbardziej symbolicznej w całym Pismie Dla mnie to trochę mało aby było pewnikiem

[tommylis]

http://www.wtl.us.edu.pl/ssht/baza/inde ... 10&lang=pl


ciekawy artykul o pojmowaniu millenium, antychrysta itp w II wieku.



http://chrzescijanin.eu/spis_pliki_i_multimedia.html

tu wyklady Dubisa mp3

[KAAN]

O milenium masz tylko jedno zdanie. w Księdze Najbardziej symbolicznej w całym Pismie

To nie jest księga symboliczna, ale zawierająca symbole, tak jak i inne księgi Biblii. Jest to księga zawierająca bardzo wiele proroctw i nie ma powodu żeby nie wierzyć w to co jest napisane. Skoro jest nbapisane że 1000 lat będzie związany szatan, to tak będzie. Ja nie widzę problemu w dosłownym rozumieniu tego proroctwa.