Fight The Good Fight Ministries has released a second video trailer for the highly anticipated video soon be released entitled, “Left Behind or Led Astray.” In anticipation of the new video’s release, Thomas Ice of the Pre-Trib Research Center was interviewed by Tom McMahon, of The Berean Call, specifically to address the claims made in the first trailer. This new trailer establishes what the early Church believed when it came to Christians enduring the great tribulation to come.
Left Behind or Led Astray (Trailer 2)
2 Comments
Leave A Comment
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
I bought and watched this DVD from Good Fight ministries last week. I had read MacPherson’s “Rapture Plot” a few years ago. I found a lot of good history in the DVD. I’m glad that there has been some needed exposure of certain people in the DVD, such as the surprising deeds of Scofield. Did watching the video and reading MacPherson’s book convince me to change my understanding of prophecy or change my mind from Pre-Trib to Post-Trib? Not at all.
I personally found much of the video irrelevant, such as who believed what and when they believed it. I understand the purpose of why the creators of the video placed all that time-line material in it. I understand why they mention the early church and the early church fathers and their non-pre-trib beliefs. Of course, the makers of the video want to reveal that they hold to the popular views of well known Christian leaders up until the Pre-Trib view began to appear in the 1800s. I get it. However, to me, what actually matters is what is in Scripture, and not who interprets this way or that way or when and where.
The reason why I consider it somewhat unimportant is that understanding prophecy, in all its doctrines, can be very difficult. Even the very prophets of God themselves may have not understood all that they wrote or that was shown to them in visions, as was true with Daniel. Daniel was puzzled, though greatly effected, by the prophecies revealed to him. Daniel expressed a need to understand his own prophecies, because he didn’t know exactly how these things will all work out. Then he was expressly told that when the time of the end comes, “the wise will understand.” The prophecies were to be “sealed” (or not understood) until the time of the end. Then when the time comes, the book of Daniel will open up, or will be “unsealed” so that we may know it properly – Dan.12: 8,9. Even then there will be much false teaching among the majority.
It’s important to remember that men like Martin Luther once believed that the book of Revelation shouldn’t be in the Bible! I know he later changed his mind. But it shows that important church leaders of the past may have a poor grasp of prophetic teachings. I believe that the closer we get to the end of the age, the clearer we should see and understand prophecy. It bothers me very little if Christian leaders from decades, centuries, or almost 2000 years ago get it wrong! In fact, I expect them to! We should have a better understanding now than they since we are nearer to the fulfillment.
Watching this DVD was like watching one group that I disagree with arguing with another group I disagree with. It’s like watching one false cult debating another false cult on who is right and who is wrong. I came away from watching the video as seeing correct teachings and wrong teachings on both sides of the issue.
One major theme in the DVD was the differing interpretation of 2 Thessalonians 2. The video was correct in stating that the Pre-Trib crowd distorts the teaching in that chapter. I do think the popular Pre-Trib interpretation is wrong regarding 2 Thess. 2 and the Antichrist and his “revelation.” However, I think the Post-Trib view of this chapter gets it wrong too.
The error that I think both sides are guilty of is misunderstanding the difference between the “revelation” of Antichrist and the “coming” of Antichrist. They are not one and the same. The popular Pre-Trib view is that Antichrist’s coming is the same thing as his revelation and that this occurs after the Rapture. Their popular slogan is “If you find out or see who the Antichrist is, then you’ve been left behind!” This is a false teaching.
What I believe the Scripture teaches is that Antichrist’s “coming” is Pre-Trib, pre-Day of the Lord, and occurs years before the Rapture. But, his coming is not his “revelation.” The coming and revelation of Antichrist are two different things! They are years apart. His coming is deceitful and very few will recognize him as Antichrist. Most will NOT connect him with Satan at his coming, “with all power, signs and lying wonders.” This is a missing puzzle piece of prophecy that hardly anyone believes, yet is absolutely crucial.
Regardless as to where one places the timing of the Rapture, Antichrist and the apostasy comes BEFORE the Day of the Lord and BEFORE the tribulation of the saints. It is Antichrist’s coming that causes the “great apostasy”/Rebellion of the last days. The Rapture, the tribulation, the Day of the Lord must await the coming of Antichrist and the apostasy. So the POST-Tribbers are right in saying that the Antichrist comes before the Day of the Lord and before the Rapture.
When 2 Thess. 2 mentions the “revelation” of Antichrist, this is NOT his coming. He must come on the scene years before his revelation. We have to ask ourselves what is his “revelation” and what causes it.
His “revelation” is when the world at large knows and recognizes Satan in the Antichrist. They will knowingly worship Satan who gives power to the Beast. But before they worship Satan, they will first worship this man at his coming. Eventually the truth of Antichrist’s connection with Satan will cause people to worship Satan too. This is the “revelation.” First comes the worship of this man (when few will connect him with Satan), followed by the worship of Satan (when it becomes clear that Satan gives Antichrist his own power).
The key to this is Rev. 12. Darby was on the right track with Rev. 12, but he didn’t quite understand it. The “revelation” of Antichrist awaits the Rapture. Rev. 12 is a picture of the attempt of Satan from his heavenly position to prevent the Rapture/Resurrection. Notice that the Red Dragon has the ten horns, which represents the kingdom of the Beast. We know the ten horns in Rev. 12 are kings who are under Antichrist’s rule and rule with him, as stated in Rev. 17:12-14. Rev. 12 is a totally future scene, not a past one and it has nothing to do with the birth or ascension of Jesus.
Before the war in heaven occurs, the Beast and his kingdom are already in power. When the time comes, no one knows the exact time, Jesus will give the command to the righteous angels to attack Satan and his angels. This is the true meaning of the term “secret Rapture.” It must be a secret time in order to keep Satan from knowing when the resurrection occurs, so that he does not know when to attack. It is also the reason why the Rapture must be instantly done, with the twinkling of an eye. If it doesn’t occur fast, perhaps Satan could have some success in preventing the Rapture of some saints.
Why are righteous angels attacking Satan and his angels in the future? Because the satanic forces plan on “devouring the man-child.” The man-child represents saints, NOT Jesus. Jesus needed no help to ascend to heaven or to “escape” the Devil. Nor was there a massive war in heaven 2000 years ago to help Jesus as a baby flee to Egypt to escape Herod. Rev. 12 is about Satan’s plan to prevent the Resurrection from succeeding. He has his man in power on earth and Satan has his powerful angelic followers in the heavenly realms (space) preparing for this event. Yes. Satan is a Pre-Trib believer.
This all-out war in heaven will allow the safe passage of all the resurrected saints to heaven and assures that Satan is cast out from heaven. When he is cast down, Satan then takes over the body of Antichrist and “resurrects” him, who has just died mysteriously (Rev.13:3 & Dan.11:20). This is the Revelation of the Wicked One. People will realize what Satan has done. But since this casting down is a defeat for Satan, he will be enraged. He couldn’t prevent the Resurrection, but he can attack the new Christian converts on earth, and this is what he does for 3.5 years, immediately following the war in heaven.
In a nut-shell, 2 Thess. 2 is telling us to expect the Antichrist to appear and to expect a great falling away from the Christian faith in the end days, before the Day of the Lord comes. When those 2 events occur, the Rapture is very near. Actually there are many other major prophetic events that must take place too before the Day of the Lord, but I won’t get into that now (Hint: Read a good translation of Obadiah). And when the Rapture occurs, the “revelation” of the “man of sin” occurs simultaneously, followed immediately by the time of trouble.
[Love your site, NoPreTrib! Here’s a hot response I saw on the net that deflates the pretrib attacks on the “Left Behind or Led Astray?” DVD. Enjoy!]
GFM’s DVD Survives Paul Wilkinson’s Attack!
by Dave MacPherson
John Darby defender Dr. Paul Wilkinson dropped some names when beginning his rebuttal of the electrifying “Left Behind or Led Astray?” DVD produced by Joe Schimmel’s Good Fight Ministries. And Wilkinson concluded, even before offering any evidence, that the DVD is full of “myths” and “lies”!
So I’ll start my response to him with the following conclusions, even before offering any evidence, that have come my way:
My first book “The Unbelievable Pre-Trib Origin” (1973) received undeserved kudos from “The Witness” (the oldest and largest Darbyist Brethren magazine in England) in April 1974: “What [MacPherson] succeeds in establishing is that the [pretrib] view outlined was first stated by a certain Margaret Macdonald…early in 1830.”
Later on world-class Australian scholar Dr. F. Nigel Lee (with nine earned doctorates) stated: “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.”
And I haven’t even thought of calling anyone a liar yet!
While feeling unqualified to respond to some of Wilkinson’s points, I will give the following facts:
When Hal Lindsey’s books see “the one taken and the other left” before the “man of sin” is revealed, we all know he’s expressing the “kernel” of the pretrib view.
But when Darby defenders read Margaret Macdonald’s 1830 pretrib rapture account (where on lines 58-63 we see what I’ve long said is her main point: “the one taken and the other left” before “THE WICKED” is “revealed”), they sound like Wilkinson who, in his rebuttal, dares to declare that “her utterance bears no resemblance whatsoever to a pre-trib Rapture.”
Guess how he gets away with this. He stops quoting her at line 45 of her 117-line account and resumes quoting at line 60 and thus can omit quoting the rapture part (“the one taken”) of her “kernel.”
Thomas Ice, Wilkinson’s American counterpart, does the same nervy thing. When quoting her account in his 1990 BibSac article about her, he stopped quoting her at line 58 (just before “the one taken” etc.) and resumed at line 72 – and thus censored ALL of her “kernel”! For insights into Ice, Wilkinson should Google “Pretrib Rapture Pride,” “Walvoord Melts Ice,” “Thomas Ice (Bloopers),” and (by a British Ph.D) “Be careful in polemics – Peripatetic Learning.”
Wilkinson even calls Margaret a posttrib and somehow doesn’t know that phrases like “The trial of the Church is from Antichrist” (lines 85-86) express her partial rapture view, that all partial rapturists (like Pember and Govett) talk the same way, and that even Walvoord’s books describe partial rapturists as “pretribulationists”! (I also urge him to Google “X-Raying Margaret,” “Margaret Macdonald’s Rapture Chart,” and “Pretrib Rapture’s Missing Lines.” And no one should confuse Margaret with Mary Campell who was involved with telepathy and automatic writing.)
When many including Darby visited Margaret in mid-1830, all (except Darby) concluded she was teaching a partial rapture form of pretrib. John Cardale visited the prayer meetings held in the Macdonald home and described them in his Dec. 1830 article in Irving’s journal “The Morning Watch” (hereafter: TMW). Cardale listed 17 details about the speakers and what they taught.
Amazingly, Darby’s 1853 book described his visit to those meetings and listed practically word-for-word all of Cardale’s details except one. Although Darby mentioned Margaret’s “texts on overcoming” (the “tribulation” part of her “kernel”), he omitted the first half of her pretrib partial rapture “kernel” – what she taught about “the coming of the Lord” (rapture) as the church’s “deliverance” before the “judgments coming on the earth” (which all, except Darby, understood as a pretrib separation!).
Irving reflected her novel view in TMW in June 1831 when he saw a pretrib rapture in Rev. 12:5’s “man child” who’s caught up, and described the scene as the “two-fold company – the one gathered before , and the other after the travailing woman is cast out into the wilderness….”
Is Wilkinson aware that TMW (Sep. 1830) was the first publication to publicly air pretrib? It saw “Philadelphia” raptured before “the great tribulation” and “Laodicea” left on earth. Meanwhile Darby was still defending posttrib in Dec. 1830 in the “Christian Herald.”
Darby idolizer Wilkinson was not happy when he heard Joe Schimmel saying that “the evidence is quite clear that Darby and his followers were late-comers to pre-tribulationism and that Darby was quite familiar with pre-trib teaching among the Irvingites before he accepted and then proliferated the doctrine….” Dr. Mark Patterson also states on the DVD that Darby learned the pre-trib rapture from Irving.
Here’s Wilkinson’s knee jerk reaction to Schimmel and Patterson: “The evidence is not only unclear, it is non-existent!”
And here’s my knee jerk reaction to Wilkinson: My Google piece “Edward Irving is Unnerving” – which mentions Patterson and Walker – proves that the evidence for Irving is existent!
Right now let’s look briefly at the earliest “rapture” development of the Irvingites and the Darbyist Brethren during the contested period stretching from 1827 to 1839:
1827: A few, including John Bray, have claimed that Darby believed in pretrib this early. But Darby’s first two papers (1827 and 1828) discussed only the “heavenly church” and the “church’s unity” – and Darby then looked for only the posttrib “restitution” and “refreshing” in Acts 3. (I invite all to Google “Is John Bray a PINO?”)
1829: Darby’s first paper on prophecy. He expected only the Rev. 19 coming. And he showed Irvingite influence. He mentioned “Mr. Irving” five times, “Ben-Ezra” (Lacunza) once, and “Morning Watch” twice. Darby said he was an avid reader of Irving’s works and journal and heard Irving preach. (My “Rapture Plot” discusses Darby on 145 pages.)
1830: Margaret had her pretrib revelation in the spring. TMW (Sep.) reflected her pretrib partial rapturism (church/church dichotomy) and saw worthy “Philadelphia” raptured before “the great tribulation” and less worthy “Laodicea” left behind. Darby was still defending posttrib historicism in Dec. in the “Christian Herald” and waiting for only Matt. 25’s “judging of the nations.” (Darby discusses TMW four times in his 1830 paper and five times in an 1831 letter. Let me add that from 1830 to 1833 TMW repeatedly taught pretrib and any-moment imminence while Darby was still defending the posttrib view, as my “Plot” portrays.)
1832: Darby still doesn’t believe in a future Antichrist but only in “present antichristian principles.”
1834: We find Darby and the Jews waiting for the same day (Heb. 10:37).
1837: Darby saw the church “going in with Him to the marriage [Rev. 19], to wit, with Jerusalem and the Jews”!
1839: Darby’s first clear pretrib teaching. His pretrib basis then (and many more years) was Rev. 12:5’s “man child” caught up before a 3.5-year tribulation – but Irving had been the first one to use this Rev. symbol for the same purpose in TMW in 1831!
True, one can find a few minor errors in the “Left Behind or Led Astray?” DVD being discussed because no one is perfect including me. But I believe that as the world gets even more scary and dangerous, more and more pretribbers will overlook any blemishes in the same DVD and will congratulate Joe Schimmel and his group for their foresight and love for God’s everlasting truth.