INTRO
It is frequently alleged that J. N. Darby got his pretribulation-rapture doctrine from Margaret MacDonald, a false-prophetess from Glasgow, Scotland, who articulated this new-fangled doctrine in 1830 under the power of a deceiving spirit. Throwing caution to the wind, Darby embraced this dubious revelation and introduced it to the broader evangelical world. On the basis of this nefarious origin, it is argued that the pretribulation-rapture teaching should be rejected as a false doctrine from hell.
Now this allegation would indeed be problematic IF IT WERE TRUE. But is it true? This accusation isn’t true just because heavy-hitting influencers insist that it is and persuade thousands of devotees to believe it. It is only true if the actual facts of history substantiate it. So let’s get down to the nitty-gritty and find out exactly what Miss MacDonald really taught.
EXCERPT FROM MARGARET MACDONALD
Here is an excerpt from Margaret MacDonald’s own handwritten account of her 1830 rapture revelation that was included in Robert Norton’s Memoirs of James & George Macdonald of Port Glasgow, published in 1840. James and George were her brothers, and they were leaders in the Pentecostal work in Scotland. The account is found on pages 171-176.
“Tis only those that are alive in him that will be caught up to meet him in the air … I saw the people of God in an awfully dangerous situation … many about to be deceived and fall. Now will THE WICKED be revealed, with all power and signs and lying wonders, so that if it were possible the very elect will be deceived—This is the fiery trial which is to try us. It will be for the purging and purifying of the real members of the body of Jesus … the love of many will wax cold …
“Now shall the awful sight of a false Christ be seen … for it is with all deceivableness of unrighteousness he will work … This is particularly the nature of the trial through which those are to pass who will be counted worthy to stand before the Son of man … The trial of the Church is from Antichrist. It is by being filled with the Spirit that we shall be kept … This will fit us to enter into the marriage supper of the Lamb.”
Notice the references to the antichrist and the tribulation, most of them allusions to Scripture.
— “the wicked shall be revealed” (2 Thess. 2:8)
— “with all power, signs, and lying wonders” (2 Thess. 2:9)
— “if it were possible the very elect will be deceived” (Matt. 24:24)
— “the love of many will wax cold” (Matt. 24:12)
— “the awful sight of a false Christ … with all deceivableness of unrighteousness” (2 Thess. 2:10)
Notice that she expressly states that the church will be tried by the antichrist.
— “this is the fiery trial which is to try us … for the purging and purifying of the real members of the body of Jesus”
— “the trial of the Church is from Antichrist”
Notice that she teaches that the church going through the tribulation is necessary for the purification of the bride.
— “the fiery trial … will be for the … purifying … of the body of Jesus”
WHEN I FIRST READ MARGARET’S TESTIMONY, I WAS DUMBFOUNDED
The first time I read Margaret’s testimony on the rapture, I was dumbfounded. Going into the investigation of her writings and beliefs, I had expected to find rapture statements that were either ambiguous or contradictory. Otherwise, how would you explain the certainty that so many have that she was the source of the pretribulation rapture? But reading her own verbatim testimony was a gut punch of reality. Her belief that the church will suffer tribulation under the antichrist is right on the surface in black and white. It can’t be missed. This radically changed my outlook.
FACTS AND INTEGRITY
There is no way under the sun that any honest person can read Margaret’s testimony and embrace the fairy tale that she taught a pretribulation rapture and that J.N. Darby got his rapture teaching from her. Those who believe that Margaret introduced the pretribulation rapture are tacitly admitting that they haven’t actually read her entire testimony for themselves but have merely trusted the claims of slick-talking teachers. Teachers marred by such slip-shod research or such dishonesty that they should not be trusted.
If you really care about facts and integrity, go do the research yourself and verify who is denying the plain facts of history. This isn’t obscure information that only a few info-nerds can access. This has been public information since the 1840s, and it is cited in several books and on several websites. But make sure you look for her original version that was published in 1840. Don’t go with the shorter version published in Norton’s The Restoration of Apostles and Prophets; In the Catholic Apostolic Church (1861) on pp 15-18. It leaves vital material out. One further warning—be even more wary of the edited versions that have been published in modern times by unscrupulous men in books that rant against the pretribulation rapture. Go with the original.
FURTHER DOCUMENTATION
If you have done your due diligence with the above step, and you want to dig deeper, make an investigation in the literature of the Irvingite movement, aka the Catholic Apostolic Church. Read the writings of Edward Irving, the biographies of Edward Irving like The Life of Edward Irving by Margaret Oliphant, and the accounts of the movement like Narrative of Facts by Robert Baxter. If you do a little research in this body of literature, you will discover — it’s a well-documented fact — that the revelations and manifestations which originated in the meeting in Port Glasgow, Scotland, where Margaret MacDonald was a central figure, were brought to London and were embraced by Edward Irving. There you will also find ample confirmation that the rapture position which the Irvingites adopted from Margaret was not a pretribulation rapture.
We read for instance, “It is well known that the delusion first appeared in Scotland, and it was brought to London by Mrs. C., who was one of the speakers and gifted at Port Glasgow. There, as far as I am informed, it has made little progress; and it was not until adopted and upheld by Mr. Irving that it began to challenge much attention and extend its influence.” (Robert Baxter, Narrative of Facts, James Nisbet, 1833, p. 141.)
Again we read, “The substance of Mary Campbell’s and Margaret McDonald’s visions or revelations, given in their papers, carry to me a spiritual conviction … which I cannot express.” (From one of Edward Irving’s letters, p. 139 of Margaret Oliphant’s The Life of Edward Irving, Vol. 2, Hurst and Blackett, 1862.)
Their regular teaching was that the rapture followed the 3.5 years of tribulation. “The declaration of the two witnesses was again repeated, and very distinctly we were commanded to count the days, one thousand three score and two hundred—1260—the days appointed for testimony, at the end of which the saints of the Lord should go up to meet the Lord in the air, and evermore be with the Lord.” (Robert Baxter, Narrative of Facts, James Nisbet, 1833, p. 17)
Their regular teaching was that the rapture would precede a time of wrath here on earth, often referred to as ‘the days of vengeance.’ “An opinion had been advanced in some of Mr. Irving’s writings, that before the setting in upon the world of the ‘days of vengeance,’ emphatically so called in the Scriptures, the saints would be caught up to heaven like Enoch and Elijah; and would be thus saved from the destruction of this world, as Noah was saved in the ark, and as Lot was saved from Sodom.” (Robert Baxter, Narrative of Facts, James Nisbet, 1833, p. 17)
The two preceding points are summed up in statements like the following. “The plan was adopted of assigning the present day as the time of fulfilment on the Gentile church … of the abomination of desolation (Matt. 24, Luke 21), and as the prelude to the days of vengeance … the great and terrible day of the Lord.” (Robert Baxter, Narrative of Facts, James Nisbet, 1833, p. 29.)
MARGARET MACDONALD’S RAPTURE POSITION
So now we have nailed down the rapture position of Margaret MacDonald, which was adopted by the Irvingites. The rapture followed 1260 days of tribulation under the antichrist and preceded a period of wrath which they called the days of vengeance or the day of the Lord. This time of wrath culminated with the second coming of the Lord.
Which rapture doctrine does this position resemble? It is definitely not a pretribulation rapture. Nor is it a classic post-tribulation rapture. Unless you close your eyes to the salient facts, you cannot fail to notice its resemblance to the modern prewrath rapture teaching. For all practical purposes, it is a prewrath rapture position. While it differs from the modern version in minor details, like the length of the great tribulation under the antichrist, the basic outline is indisputably the same. Great tribulation, rapture, time of wrath, second coming.
WHAT CREATED THE STIR?
Since the Irvingites didn’t actually teach a pretribulation rapture, what part of their rapture teaching was responsible for creating a stir? The hullabaloo was caused by two related points. First of all, they located the rapture prior to the second coming. This was contrary to the common position which located the rapture at the second coming. Secondly, they distinguished the time of wrath (the days of vengeance) from the time of tribulation. The wrath followed on the heels of the tribulation. Historically, men had equated the days of vengeance and the time of tribulation. They had regarded them as different labels for the same period of time. The former emphasized the judgment of the ungodly. The latter emphasized the suffering of the believers. This time of judgment and tribulation continued until the awful display of wrath without mercy that will be manifested at the second coming.
THE PREWRATH RAPTURE HUNG ON HAMAN’S GALLOWS
Now bringing to light the rapture teaching that Margaret MacDonald received in a revelation poses a challenge to the prewrath rapture camp. They have claimed that the pretribulation rapture should be rejected as a lie from hell because it originated with a prophecy given through demonic power. Were they sincere when they made this claim? If they were sincere, they will gladly abandon the prewrath rapture because the facts of history prove that it is their view of the rapture that originated with a demonically-inspired prophecy. If they were not sincere, they will not be fazed and will continue pushing the lie. Insincerity is par for the course with error. The needle on the compass of error doesn’t lead through facts and evidence to truth. It leads through the quagmire of murky arguments and selective evidence to positions already assumed by prejudice.
This brings us to the picture of Haman. Haman built a gallows to hang Mordecai for a supposed injustice. The prewrath rapture advocates erected a gallows to hang the pretribulation rapture because it was supposedly guilty of the crime of demonic origin. (Personally, I agree with the theory of this argument. If a doctrine originates from a revelation given by a lying spirit, the teaching should be rejected.) Now, when the truth came out that Haman was actually the one guilty of grave injustice, he himself was soon swinging from the very gallows that he had erected for Mordecai. Likewise, now that the truth has come out that it is the prewrath rapture that was actually introduced by demonic revelation, then honest men will see to it that the prewrath rapture swings from the very gallows it had erected for the pretribulation rapture.
CONCLUSION
It is 100% inexcusable for anyone to teach that Darby got his pretribulation rapture teaching from Margaret MacDonald. Her entire testimony can be read in the time it takes to brew and drink a cup of coffee. In those six pages you will clearly see that she taught a prewrath rapture. Several additional hours of study with online books and the search function will validate the fact that the Irvingites received and taught Margaret’s prewrath rapture. This isn’t a monumental amount of work. If folks have time to spend hours on the internet watching YouTube preachers spin yarns like the MacDonald-Darby connection, they have time for a few hours of serious research.
May our shortcomings in theological questions—both doctrinal and historical—only be traced to ignorance. May they never be traced to prejudice. Ignorance can be fixed with a dose of knowledge. But prejudice is nearly impossible to fix. Prejudice is wiser than seven men who can render a reason. Prejudice is nearly impervious to facts, logic, and well-framed arguments.
Eyes wide open, brain engaged, heart on fire,
Lee W. Brainard
FOR MORE INFORMATION
If you would like an easy introduction to the subject, you can order a copy of our easy-to-read version of Robert Baxter’s Narrative of Facts.
I also have a YouTube video that covers much of the same information. See Margaret MacDonald: Taught Prewrath Not Pretrib.
No Comments