All you posties and amils and postmils and preterists and assorted eschatological wannabees are simply jealous because you cannot come up with the kind of quality charts that dispensationalists have provided over the years. Here’s one:
This is about the best non-dispy chart I’ve seen.
I will not name the author of the non-dispy chart, because I don’t want to embarrass Mike Bergmann. But until you guys can come up with some riveting fiction and a decent chart or two, your positions will never have any credibility.
{ 72 comments… read them below or add one }
The dipsy chart looks like Obama’s health care plan.
LOL
That’s cold.
it WAS funny
OK, now I’ve laughed enough for today. Oh well what is one more time. That was funny Lydia.
I have always wondered how the perspicuity of Scripture co-exists w/ needing about 10 super computers to interpret charts and graphs…
I think the health plan is actually simpler!
there was Adam, the first man
there was a ‘holy family’ . . . (Noah)
and then there was a ‘tribe’ . . . (Father Abraham)
and then there was a ‘nation’ . . . (Moses)
and then there was a ‘kingdom’ . . . (King David)
and then there was an ‘Ekklesia’ (Lord Jesus Christ Son Savior))
Kim Riddlebarger, Amill extraordinaire, offers charts: http://kimriddlebarger.squarespace.com/the-latest-post/2012/1/4/you-cant-talk-about-eschatology-without-a-chart-right.html
I don’t know this Bergmann dude…
But that is a Bergman crayon-art classic!
The creepy gnome dude is a dispensationalist… that’s why he’s off by himself… and creepy…
At least I protected your identity.
Hey… I think its a piece of art and I’m proud of it…
Of course I’m also the one w/ a pic (not drawn by me, btw) hanging on my office/study door of the great chicago fire w/ a spaceship hovering above town…
So my art taste might need some work!
Mike, I’m an anti-gnome-ian, y’know…
Here’s to you, young man!
Three cheers for crayons and for amillennial dispensationalists.
There wasn’t a picture of a test tube ( T T T = Test Tube Theology ) so that James 2:26 when properly disected by “qualified learneds” doesn’t mean what it says ; we have to go to some other Scripture and to someone else to interpret it so that we may “understand” it .
I especially like a Daniel dispensational chart with extra long toes. Neat.
http://low5point.files.wordpress.com/2009/01/long-toes1.jpg?w=500&h=224
I was going to make some crack about your use of “riveting fiction” as necessary for your particular chart…
But I think I’ll think better of it.
Liberal.
I only repeated your own words
Honestly, I have no idea quite where I fit in this great scheme. Jesus is coming back, that much I know and not much else.
Question:
when was ‘Dispensationalism’ first taught as a doctrine ?
By Daniel in 550 BC, then by the Apostle Paul during the NT Era. We’re not really looking to get into a heavy-duty eschatology nuke-out here.
I think that it’s important to note that eschatology is just one facet of dispensationalim. It’s really sort of a panoramic view of the history of the relationship between God and man.
And it has really cool charts.
“We’re not really looking to get into a heavy-duty eschatology nuke-out here”
Dave, you are just no fun at all!
)
BTW: I am a pan-mil.
L’s,
Back when the Jews had straw for making brick, they talked about it a lot.
Then when Pharaoh took away their straw, they did not have much time to talk about it much.
Have you been over at the Lutheran church taking nips at the communion wine again?
Dave,
That is funny. When we lived in PA, my wife was the director of HR for the Lutheran Seminary. (same position she held in a SBC seminary for a good while) Those folks drank a lot of wine.
UPS must have delivered the order I shipped to him…..CB what was that VISA card number again, I misplaced it.
BR549
CB,
Can’t be that one that belongs to Dave Miller for his monthly order of sacramental wine…..like the ‘piscopalians use.
You said that transaction would be confidential, Jake.
Sorry Dave,
That just slipped out…..we have the Vegas rule at the store…..don’t we have that on your blog?
About 150 years ago, when Harold Camping was a boy.
I’m learning not to ask important questions on a football weekend. You guys are crazy. LOL
To answer your question, the idea that dispensationalism is a relatively recent doctrine is easily refuted by reading the early church fathers. Irenaeus, Tertullian, and Augustine as well as many others believed in a literal AntiChrist who would rise up in the future. Ammil and Postmil deny a literal antiChrist. Preterists believe that Nero was the AntiChrist, but many of the Church fathers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries held that this rising up of the anti Christ was a future event.
I hate to bring a serious note to a frivolous topic, but here goes.
Do you think the current evangelical antipathy towards environmentalism issues is a result of (or related to) the widespread acceptance of premil dispensationalism?
By the way, John Hagee’s chart a few years back had big red apples on it. And they could be moved!
Thanks for the name. I’ll look Hagee up. So far, all I’ve done is come across ‘Darby’ and ‘Scofield’ (something about some footnotes he wrote in a Bible)
Scofield and Darby are two of the bigger names in popularizing Dispensationalism in recent centuries for our culture.
They are not quite definitive, but the foundation is found there pretty well.
Do I think it’s a reslt of widespread acceptance of premil dispensationalism? No, for two reasons: 1.) The acceptance of Premil Dispensationalism is not widespread…2.) Although I think it can play a role for some people I think antipathy toward environmentalism is more a result of a disgust for the fanatic environmentalism.
Seriously? I was a Christian for years before I knew there were alternatives to premil dispy. Maybe I’m just isolated, but among evangelicals I think you might be wrong about this.
I don’t want to paint all dispys with the same brush, but the strong impression I get (from them) is that it doesn’t matter if we turn the planet into a festering dung-heap because the rapture will happen any moment and God will clean everything up.
John Wylie,
Why do you maintain Premillennial Dispensationalism was/is not widespread?
It seems that this position was the position held by conservative evangelicals for years. There were/ are even Study Bibles geared to the position.
I am interested in how you came to your conclusion.
Well CB and Bill Mac,
Even our BFM does not take a dipensational approach, it is ambiguous because of all the different views out there. Almost every young preacher I know coming out of SBC seminaries holds either an ammil of preterist view. I don’t have hard and fast stats but that’s been my experience. Btw, there are several study Bibles out there that do not espouse a dispensational viewpoint.
Bill, what I took issue with your statement about is that you attributed antipathy to environmentalism entirely to premil dispensationalism. (Go back and carefully read your statement) There are people who can’t spell dispensationalism who absolutely bristle at the current Al Gore crazy earth worship. Don’t blame that on dispensationalism blame it on the more fanatical elements of the environmentalist movement. However, I did admit that the dispensational view can play a role but it’s not to blame entirely.
OK. Going back and looking over my comment carefully, it looks to me like I did no such thing. I asked a question, I didn’t make a pronouncement. And lest I be accused of the very thing you accuse me of, I qualified it with a few words in parentheses (or related to).
But I guess now I will give my opinion. I think evangelical antipathy towards environmentalism has two strong motivators: Dispensationalism and Republicanism. How strong no one can say. There may be other factors but those are the two that are the most evident to me.
Bill Mac,
What about the “people are just nasty” response? I thought that was pretty good. Unless, of course you believe only Republicans and Premils are nasty.
Bill Mac,
You are right you did say (or related to), my apologies sir. I wasn’t trying to accuse you of anything, I was just expressing disagreement. My opinion is yes it can play a role but it is not the sole cause, or even the main one. As to your “Republicanism” comment, I’ll just remind who started the EPA…Richard Nixon. I’ll not get into all the plagues that have been brought on this nation by “Democratism”.
CB: Republicans are nasty. Well, except for me. And one or two other guys. Don’t get me started on Southern Republicans. Most of those guys prefer pork bbq over beef bbq. Makes you believe in total depravity.
John: The problem is I think you are reading too much motive into my question. Although I have my opinions, I wanted the question to be fairly academic. I’ll post a longer response later when I get the time. Gotta go feed the sheep.
(no, I’m not a pastor. I really have sheep. )
I thought I posted a lengthy comment but I don’t see it, so I’ll substitute a shorter one.
Evangelicals reject the claims of scientists for only about 3 reasons.
1: They are trained scientists themselves and see flaws in the research.
2: The claims do not line up with a particular interpretation of scripture, such as with evolution/earth age.
3: The science interferes with their political views. In other words, the Democrats are in agreement with it, therefore we Republicans must be against it.
I think evangelical antipathy towards environmentalism is a mixture of 2 and 3, assuming they hold to premil dispensationalism and are Republicans. I’m curious to know which of the two influences is the stronger.
I looked for it and didn’t find it in any of our folders, Bill.
Bill Mac,
I know you’re not seeking to broaden this discussion (or I think you’re not), but the evolution thing is rejected by lots of Christians not just dispensationalists. Dr. Mohler, for instance, is not a dispensationalist but he’s not an evolutionist either. In fact, many reformed people reject evolution. As you know, people can believe in an old earth, and still reject evolution. Even honest scientists will admit that evolution has not been proven.
For me number 3 would play a bigger role on the environmental thing rather than dispensationalism. I mean seriously no one wants their water or air poisoned. What puts me off, and I can only speak for me, is the extremism among the environmental left. Do you honestly think that Al Gore is at all rational or reasonable when stating his case? I believe that God created the earth for our use, not the other way around, the human race is not a plague on the planet. I believe that evolution and radical environmentalism is not truly science driven, as much as it is ideology driven.
John: I’m afraid I’m not communicating very well. I just used the evolution thing as an example of rejecting science because of a biblical interpretation. I’m only saying I think dispensationalists do this with environmentalism based at least in part by their eschatology.
Naw Bill Mac. I think the antipathy is simply because people are nasty no matter what eschatological view they embrace.
Too bad you folks have never read David Lutzweiler’s The Praise of Folly. Draper, Va.:Apologetics Group Media, 2009. Subtitled, The Enigmatic Life and Theology of C.I. Scofield. One of the things pre-trib, premil, eschatology has done is get old Rome off of the hot seat at the Antichrist. Now we spend our time looking for some esoteric individual instead of considering the original, according to the Waldensians, for the character, that is, a movement and not a person, an institution, something bigger than any one glorified (so-called) individual. And with the kind of technological advances we have now, we might well have some, supposedly alien ships come over head, use some antigrav-wave devices, and rapture out a bunch of people to terrible deaths in deep space. Flying saucer technology has been with us over 60-70 years, perhaps even longer, if the thing that exploded over Tungunguska (sp) was a Tesla experiment involving zero point energies gone awry. Too bad some folks never read outside the box, one of the advantages of being trained in Black History, where you are taught to do so deliberately, Imagine what we could discover, if we would go back and explore our church records and other sources for real theological insights which might well provide us with better understanding of our Bibles and our theology and of the ideas and etc. of Great Awakenings. The half has never been told. Consider how we might well start praying for a Third Great Awakening and that it could begin in this generation and win every soul on earth and continue for a 1000 generations and a million, million planets throughout some 20,000-100,000 years just so God can crak a humorous remark to the effect that the number of the redeemed in Heaven will be a number no one (even God?) can number…which surely must be humor designed to make His children laugh happily, gladly, gloriously, under the most difficult and despairing of circumstances. Really blows David’s charts to smithereens to have a honest to God post millenialist responding. Hey, David? Have a good laugh. We baptists do allow our selves some humor,especially over last things, for we all know that which is last, lasts.//and it will be the Lord’s last in any case.
I didn’t really want this to become a heavy discussion of eschatology – just trying to have some Saturday fun.
But Darby, Scofield and a few others were the first to codify the Dispensational system – and much that they codified has been rejected or revised significantly by modern dispensationalists. At Dallas Seminary, Scofield was seldom mentioned in class.
But some of the elements of dispensationalism can be traced back much farther. The idea that none of this system existed prior to Darby et al is a common mumpsimus repeated by opponents of dispensationalism.
None of our current systems, even so-called “historical” premillennialism were finished systems even in the early church.
Dave,
So the Scofield was not mentioned much at DTS? Well, that just goes to prove to you that you received a poor education there.
I remember when Dr. Patterson was president of SEBTS, the Schofield Model 3 in .44 cal. Russian was spoken of quite frequently. It was highly regarded as an introduction to teaching the “end time” for “when wolves creep in unaware.”
Yes, it does go back past Darby, though according to Dr. John Coleman, the decision to put Darby’s views into play were made by the British East Indies Company Board and that the purpose was to divert money from Christian Missions in the 20th century to the nation of israel..and this decision was made for that purpose in the early part of the 19th century (early 1800s). Sort of like reading about the references to WWI and WWII in social revolutionary G. Mazzini’s letter to Albert Pike, circa 187(?) which I have seen quoted in several sources and which was supposed to have been on display in the British Museum for several years but is now generally denied.(naturally). Nothing is like it seems, and hidden things of deception are at work, always preparing surprises to spring on us in the hope that we shall be swept off of our feet with some new yucks.
Sorry, didn’t mean to spoil your fun by getting too heavy and deep. I even know of some of the predecessors of Darby, but have forgotten them. One was a Jesuit from Chile (in the 1700s and whose work got introduced into Protestantism by the Presbyterian chariismatic in London circa 1825) and another was an Archbishop who wrote a work in the 1600s.
As to finished systems of eschatology, the depth of scripture is so great that no mind can comprehend it except the MIND OF ITS ORIGIN. We can see it in crystal clarity and faith to comprehend it because we have no depth perception to speak of.
I had a friend who got booted out of DTS, because back in the late 60s or early 70s (I’m not sure of the date) he did not dot his Is’ and cross his Ts’ like they desired at that time. Anyway that is what he told me…and others.
The Lutzweiler work is worth a reading as David’s father was one of the early supporters and promoters of Scofieldianism, and David was to wind up sorely disappointed in what he found about Scofield. Does make one think that perhaps Jack Chic’s publications were not too far wrong about catholic infiltration and that there are such persons as half coated Jesuits!!!(whatever that means)..and lest anything I am just a bigot, let me say I do believe there are catholics who are saved…and even catholics are concerned about their own church…just do some googling.
Probably the best chart would be the following:
Wow! (letting God fill in what He really means…my aim is to win the whole earth, beginning with this generation and continuing for a 1000 generations and a 100,000 years and a million, million planets.
I’m a premillennialist who is all for reasonable environmentalism. I reject, however, the environmental extremists who say driving a car is killing the polar bears and causing global warming (I was taught global cooling as a kid). By the way, they seem to all drive cars as well.
I’ve hunted, fished, trapped and love the outdoors and those kind of folks give more to the environment than about anyone. I care about and know many of the basics about environmental diversity and enhancing wildlife habitat. I’ve planted way more than my share of trees.
You can easily do all this and be a good, consistent premillennialist. We should all do all we can to make this world, God’s creation, a better place to live. The same goes for voting your convictions and making this nation a better, stronger country. The premillennialists I know in no way want to trash the environment.
David R. Brumbelow
When I think premillennialists, especially of the dispensational variety, the first thing that pops into my head are creepy gnome dudes… the second thing is a picture of C. Montgomery Burns looking on as his nuclear plant dumps toxic waste into Lake Springfield.
That’s a joke, of course…
Though I’m not sure if I get in trouble for making a Simpson’s reference on a baptist blog???
I may need to go onto that graphs and rename the creepy gnome dude as “Mike Bergman” – one n.
A-Men David R. Brumbelow.
Hunters, trappers, and fisherman put a lot of money in conservation of the natural environment — more than most. Many, if not most, national parks were championed by a great hunter, Teddy Roosevelt. Think of what Yellowstone would be without Teddy?
But I must caution you about what you stated about killing Polar Bears with motor vehicles. David R. Brumbelow, a fellow can kill a Polar Bear if he runs over him with a F-350 Ford truck. But he better make sure he is dead before gettin’ out of that truck. ‘Cause if that bear ain’t dead, he’s gonna be real mad.
I’ve also been all three, although I don’t think I could be a trapper again. I’m not sorry I did it when I was a younger man, but I’ve come to believe we shouldn’t kill things we aren’t going to eat.
Bill Mac,
I am glad you have decided not to kill things you don’t eat. I may come to NY and visit you now that I know you forbid yourself of shootin’ people.
Just leave the cornbread and grits at home. I’ll have the beef brisket ready.
I try to avoid the term “environmentalism”, as it carries a political charge of a decidedly leftward twist. I speak instead of “stewardship” and teach that we are to care for God’s creation. We are to use it. We are to manage it. We are to maintain it. We are not to worship it. All the while trusting in the sovereign providence of God that the creation, groaning as it is, will last exactly as long as He intended to fulfill His plans.
Squirrel
Well, Dave–in all seriousness, I’ve got a post churning in my head… goes back to that other post you made in which you offered up the challenge to seriously engage with the scholars and the text. So I dusted off my Pentecost (and his quotes of Walvoord and Ryrie are legion) and Chafer…
…it would take years of blogging to engage the entire dispensational system, but I got an idea about engaging them on matters of the Abrahamic covenant and the land promises, as that is a part of the system.
I might have that sometime in February, after I get back from Zambia, where I’m about ready to go teach the Song of Solomon to a bunch of Zambian pastors. I’m using “Real Marriage” as my text book, btw…
…Okay the seriousness just dropped out of the post, though SoS is part of what I’m teaching there, I’m just leaving Driscoll in the states.
Personally, I would prefer the two bisley colts with their holsters and belt that was for sale for $90.00 just down the street from the dorm where I attended college in my first year (East Texas Baptist, ’58-’59). Had I bought them then, I could have sold them for $3,000 in ’72, when I went to my thrid church. And for10,000 by 2005 or more. Jesse and John Wesley Hardin preferred them scofields, I guess they were heavier. My Great Grand Pappy preferred a 38 cal. colt cause you get more shots off in quicker time. He would do a fast draw on the back porch and shoot the head off of a Guiena Hen in Milano, Deep in the Heart of Texas. B.H. Carroll’s brother just about died with laughter about B.H. making a lucky shot, taking a bird on the wing, since B.H. was the worst shot in the family. Now if a post-mill. could do that that long ago, imagine David, what my Post-Millenialism will do, even if we thrown in another couple of hundred years for the stupid conspiracy now in operation to follow through to its gutteral end in the light of the Third Great Awakening, Ps.73:19 and Dan.2 re: the stone becoming a great mountain and filling the whole earth.
I do hope you have a sense of humor David.
You know James,
A Guiena ain’t half bad eatin’ if you cook it right. And they make great watch dogs. Nobody can sneak up on a flock of Guienas roostin’ in your Crape Myrtle bushes. You can get the drop on an outlaw with a S&W Schofield or a Bisley Colt either one if you own a flock of Guienas and pay attention to them when they get startled.
I would like to buy you a cup or two of good coffee some day James, and hear your whole story. You are an interesting fellow. You have certainly “seen a thang or two.”
Why do all Dispensationalist speak in tongues while drinking alcohol? Consider yourself trolled Miller!
Be happy to meet your CB. Bet you have an interesting story or two also. Now if we could just get David straightened out about the best charts being post-mills covering 1000 generations and a number in Heaven even the Lord wouldn’t care to count, such a post being utterly unlimited and a chart utterly unending vistas of redeemed souls. And why not. I figure the devil has enough in hell, a narrow pit of a lake, compared to the cubed city of 1600 miles as well as the endless green emerald sea stretching infinitely forever in every direction.
[Just for laughs from amills - or tears from dispies - here's what I saw on the web]
SCHOLARS WEIGH MY RESEARCH (update)
by Dave MacPherson
(For more than 40 years my pretrib critics have falsely claimed that leading scholars condemn my research. Since those critics continue to deliberately distort and censor (even on Wikipedia etc.) my evidence that Edward Irving’s group as well as Margaret Macdonald taught a pretrib rapture before John Darby and his group did, I hereby present reactions to my research from leading scholars who haven’t had a huge axe to grind either for or against pretrib dispensationalism. See web articles like “Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty” and “More Facts About Margaret Macdonald.”
Loraine Boettner (theologian, author): “I think that you have done a magnificent job in showing the real origin of the Pre-trib rapture theory.”
F. F. Bruce (theologian, encyclopedia contributor): “It is strange that Darby should acknowledge his indebtedness to a young lady in Limerick and say nothing about the young lady in Port Glasgow [that is, not acknowledge her pre-Antichrist rapture of part of the church]….If this work of yours can do anything to counter the influence of Hal Lindsey…, you will have rendered a signal service.” Superficial—-and even devious—-scholarship loves to repeat Bruce’s 1975 surmise that pretrib was “in the air in the 1820s and 1830s.” Hired critic Thomas Ice knows that this wasn’t a scientific conclusion (does reliable data rest literally “in the air”?), and Ice moreover has ignored Bruce’s later statements complimenting my evidence!
Gary DeMar (theologian, author): “THE RAPTURE PLOT is the never-before-told, true story of the plot—-how plagiarism and subtle document changes created the ‘mother of all revisionisms.’ A fascinating piece of detective work.”
Robert H. Gundry (theologian, author): “As usual, Dave MacPherson overwhelms his critics with a superior knowledge of the primary sources. His is a rare combination of historical research and investigative reporting. Those who would refute him have failed to outhustle him, especially in the tracking down of information uncatalogued in academic libraries.” Superficial scholarship is aware that the first—-1973—-printing of Gundry’s THE CHURCH AND THE TRIBULATION stated on pp. 185, 187: “The likelihood is that Edward Irving was the first to suggest the pretribulational rapture….the outpouring on Margaret Macdonald did not include revelation of a pretribulational rapture….” But careful scholarship has long known that after Gundry saw my Macdonald findings, he deleted his Irving statement and substituted favorable comments about the Scottish lassie—-changes appearing in his classic work since the 1980′s!
John H. Kromminga (Calvin Sem. president emeritus): “The material appears to be well researched, and this impression is confirmed by the excellent comments you cite from well-established evangelical commentators.”
Francis Nigel Lee (church historian etc., 9 earned doctorates!): “Dave MacPherson, in his various books, has made a major contribution toward vindicating Historic Christian Eschatology. The 1830 innovations of the disturbed Margaret Macdonald documented by MacPherson – in part or in whole – immediately spread to Edward Irving and his followers, then to J. N. Darby and Plymouth Brethrenism, and were later popularized by the dispensationalistic Scofield Reference Bible, by Classic Pentecostalism, and by latter-day pretribulationists like J. F. Walvoord and Hal Lindsey.”
Harold Lindsell (church historian, author): “…must reading for anyone who is interested in the [pretrib] origins….”
C. S. Lovett (pastor, author): “You have to be, in my opinion, the world’s authority on Margaret.”
Peter Marshall (pastor, author): “I am in emphatic agreement with you on your thesis.”
Walter Martin (researcher, author): “[MacPherson has produced] a fascinating historical detective story…with surprising and not easily refutable conclusions.”
J. Gordon Melton (editor): “According to the best scholarship available, the pretribulation, premillennial eschatology originated among members of the Catholic Apostolic Church as a result of a vision and revelation to Margaret MacDonald. See Dave MacPherson, THE UNBELIEVABLE PRE-TRIB ORIGIN.” (ENCYCLOPEDIA OF AMERICAN RELIGIONS, 1978)
Gary North (author, church historian): “…Dave MacPherson has inflicted a deep wound on the pre-trib camp by showing that a teenage Scottish girl named Margaret Macdonald…came up with this doctrine….” (Dispensationalism in Transition, Nov., 1988)
Harold J. Ockenga (theologian, author): “You have done your research well.”
J. I. Packer (author, church historian): “From my own explorations of the origins of Darbyism I judge that you are presenting facts fairly, and I am glad you are, for I also regard dispensationalism as an unhappy aberration.”
J. Barton Payne (theologian, author): “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)
The Prairie Overcomer (Canada): “…MacPherson’s case seems to be watertight.” (July, 1974)
Reformed Review: “MacPherson has done excellent historical research.” (Spring, 1985)
Ian S. Rennie (author, church historian): “…it is likely that [Margaret's revelation] was grist for Darby’s mill.” (DREAMS, VISIONS AND ORACLES, 1977)
R. J. Rushdoony (theologian, author): “Dave MacPherson has been responsible for major change in the eschatology of evangelical churches by his devastating studies of some of the central aspects thereof. In THE RAPTURE PLOT MacPherson tells us of the strange tale of ‘rapture’ writings, revisions, cover-ups, altercations, and confusions. No one has equalled MacPherson in his research on the ‘pre-trib rapture.’ Attempts to discredit his research have failed….”
The Seminary Review: “[MacPherson] shows conclusively that Margaret Macdonald was the originator of the concept.” (June, 1984)
Oswald J. Smith (pastor, author): “You have some excellent thoughts here that will be difficult to answer.”
Merrill C. Tenney (theologian, author): “…the connection between Margaret Macdonald and Irvingites and Brethren is reasonably well established. You have done a valuable piece of research.”
The Witness (oldest & largest Darbyist Brethren magazine in England): “What [MacPherson] succeeds in establishing is that the [pretrib] view outlined was first stated by a certain Margaret Macdonald…early in 1830.” (April, 1974)
(The critics who have tried to cover up the above scholarship are basically the ones who’ve tried to muddy the waters by “discovering” hints of pretrib before 1830. For more on this, see my internet article entitled “Deceiving And Being Deceived.”)