John MacArthur (P. B. U. H.) Will Get You Rapture Ready For Saturday!

by

John MacArthur (P. B. U. H.) unlike Brian McLaren and his Emerging Babylonian hordes never falls prey to the winds of ear-tickling doctrines. This is because Saint John MacArthur (P. B. U. H.) keeps his doctrines so Purer than anyone else’s that he can never fail at being the True Truth Warrior of Absolute Biblical Truth that he Truly is. Take the Pure Biblical Doctrine of the Rapture for instance—John MacArthur (P. B. U. H.) has said: “It’s become kind of popular today, in the last two or three years, to believe in the rapture occurring at the end of the tribulation. There has been three positions, historically, “pre-trib,” “mid-trib,” and “post-trib.” What that means is the rapture occurs at the end of the tribulation: “post-tribulation;” the middle of the tribulation: “mid-tribulation;” the beginning of the tribulation: “pre-tribulation.” Now if you wanted to catalog me I would have to claim to be a “pre-tribulationist.” I believe the Church will be taken out before the tribulation.

Of course because Truth Matters, we all know that the Rapture is Pure Biblical Teaching and not a man-made invention by a deluded Scottish teenager unlike Brian McLaren’s heretical notion that the Kingdom of God is present in the world and within us. Phil Johnson and the Pyromaniacs agree as John MacArthur (P. B. U. H.) has also said after being questioned about his Premillenial Dispensationalist Rapture beliefs:

Questioner: I am concern about Dispensationalism, I have been listening to Charles Swindoll, yourself and Dave Hawking, I really enjoy their ministry. And they all preach the pre-tribulation rapture, and I can buy that. I think it’s great. And then I hear some other respected men in the Lord say, “Well that is a dispensational point of view,” and they imply that that is something that has taken place within the last hundred years or so within the church. I just like to hear a little from you.

John MacArthur’s Answer: You see, that is just a label that they throw. What do you mean a dispensational point of view? The word dispensation is a NT word, Paul said “It was committed unto him the dispensation of the grace of God, dispensation of the mysteries.” It simply means a stewardship, it’s simply a term, that’s all. This is the accusation over and over again that Dispensationalism popped up with J. N. Darby, and C. I. Scofield, and all of that? But we are not working our way through a system, but rather attempting to interpret scripture on its own merit.

Ok, you have some basic things to deal with. Dispensationalism, by the way, is simply a title for theology that recognizes a literal nation Israel to be restored in the future. And recognizes a literal kingdom, and a literal tribulation, and a literal return, and a literal rapture, and that is dispensational. The other perspective is what’s called non-dispensational or covenant theology, which has no place for Israel, no kingdom in the future, and spiritualizes everything rather than making it literal.

Now, what you have to do is to go back to some very basic things. Dispensation simply means that God manages things in a certain way at a certain time. Everybody is a dispensationalist, everybody. I don’t care who they are in theology, they’re dispensational.

Elsewhere John MacArthur (P. B. U. H.) has defined Every Self-Respecting Calvinist as a Premillennial Dispensationalist—in other words all True Christians are Premillenial Dispensationalist Rapture believers like John MacArthur (P. B. U. H.) and Harold Camping. We hope this helps get you Rapture Ready for the Rapture and Judgement Day this Saturday—oh and don’t forget to buy one of our handy dandy RaptureHatches to be prepared… so  don’t get Left Behind with the unregenerate non-Elect heathens… be Rapture Ready with our Final Prophet John MacArthur (P. B. U. H.).

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

7 Responses to “John MacArthur (P. B. U. H.) Will Get You Rapture Ready For Saturday!”

  1. Fanatic for Jesus calls John MacArthur’s Jesus: “New Age.” « The Official Blog Of God's Only Inerrant Party Says:

    […] The Official Blog Of God's Only Inerrant Party Just another WordPress.com weblog « John MacArthur (P. B. U. H.) Will Get You Rapture Ready For Saturday! […]

  2. Lanie Says:

    [Have you seen this new web article, Don? Whew!]

    PRETRIB RAPTURE SECRETS

    How can the “rapture” be “imminent”? Acts 3:21 says that Jesus “must” stay in heaven (He’s now there with the Father) “until the times of restitution of all things” which includes, says Scofield, “the restoration of the theocracy under David’s Son” which obviously can’t begin before or during Antichrist’s reign. (“The Rapture Question,” by the long time No. 1 pretrib authority John Walvoord, didn’t dare to even list, in its scripture index, the too-hot-to-handle Acts 3:21!) Since Jesus can’t even leave heaven before the tribulation ends (Acts 2:34, 35 echo this), the rapture therefore can’t take place before the end of the trib! (The above verses from Acts were also too hot for John Darby – the so-called “father of dispensationalism” – to list in the scripture index in his “Letters”!)
    Paul explains the “times and the seasons” (I Thess. 5:1) of the catching up (I Thess. 4:17) as the “day of the Lord” (5:2) which FOLLOWS the posttrib sun/moon darkening (Matt. 24:29; Acts 2:20) WHEN “sudden destruction” (5:3) of the wicked occurs! The “rest” for “all them that believe” is tied to such destruction in II Thess. 1:6-10! (If the wicked are destroyed before or during the trib, who’d be left alive to serve the Antichrist?) Paul also ties the change-into-immortality “rapture” (I Cor. 15:52) to the posttrib end of “death” (15:54). (Will death be ended before or during the trib? Of course not! And vs. 54 is also tied to Isa. 25:8 which is Israel’s posttrib resurrection!)
    Many are unaware that before 1830 all Christians had always viewed I Thess. 4’s “catching up” as an integral part of the final second coming to earth. In 1830 this “rapture” was stretched forward and turned into a separate coming of Christ. To further strengthen their novel view, which the mass of evangelical scholars rejected throughout the 1800s, pretrib teachers in the early 1900s began to stretch forward the “day of the Lord” (what Darby and Scofield never dared to do) and hook it up with their already-stretched-forward “rapture.” Many leading evangelical scholars still weren’t convinced of pretrib, so pretrib teachers then began teaching that the “falling away” of II Thess. 2:3 is really a pretrib rapture (the same as saying that the “rapture” in 2:3 must happen before the “rapture” [“gathering”] in 2:1 can happen – the height of desperation!).
    Other Google articles on the 181-year-old pretrib rapture view include “Famous Rapture Watchers,” “Pretrib Rapture Diehards,” “X-Raying Margaret,” “Edward Irving is Unnerving,” “Thomas Ice (Bloopers),” “Walvoord Melts Ice,” “Wily Jeffrey,” “The Rapture Index (Mad Theology),” “America’s Pretrib Rapture Traffickers,” “Roots of (Warlike) Christian Zionism,” “Scholars Weigh My Research,” “Pretrib Hypocrisy,” “Pretrib Rapture Secrecy,” “Deceiving and Being Deceived,” and “Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty” – all by the author of the bestselling book “The Rapture Plot” (see Armageddon Books).

  3. dave stamper Says:

    you are wrong-there is nothing in 1cor15,1st thes 4, or john 14 about the rapture.Re-read, dead raised, meet in a cloud and preparing a place does not denor a rature. You are looking at scripture with a pre-disposed position to the rapture. I’m afraid hank hannagraaf ‘s apocalypse code makes much more sense. You shouldn’t read, no noone should,between the lines.f you have misled folks on this, I beleive you did it in ignorance , not malice, but I beleive you would be better off leaving what you’re not sure of alone. Lets say you and r c sproll and hank hanagraff can’t all be right or wrong since you all differ, but someone’s add a jot or a tittle, and you don’t want to do that, be careful.

  4. Irv Says:

    Margaret Macdonald’s Rapture Chart !

    “church” RAPTURE “church”
    (present age) (tribulation)

    In early 1830 Margaret was the very first one to see a pre-Antichrist (pretrib) rapture in the Bible – and John Walvoord and Hal Lindsey lend support for this claim!
    Walvoord’s “Rapture Question” (1979) says her view resembles the “partial-rapture view” and Lindsey’s “The Rapture” (1983) admits that “she definitely teaches a partial rapture.”
    But there’s more. Lindsey (p. 26) says that partial rapturists see only “spiritual” Christians in the rapture and “unspiritual” ones left behind to endure Antichrist’s trial. And Walvoord (p. 97) calls partial rapturists “pretribulationists”!
    Margaret’s pretrib view was a partial rapture form of it since only those “filled with the Spirit” would be raptured before the revealing of the Antichrist. A few critics, who’ve been repeating more than researching, have noted “Church” in the tribulation section of her account. Since they haven’t known that all partial rapturists see “Church” on earth after their pretrib rapture (see above chart), they’ve wrongly assumed that Margaret was a posttrib!
    In Sep. 1830 Edward Irving’s journal “The Morning Watch” (hereafter: TMW) was the first to publicly reflect her novel view when it saw spiritual “Philadelphia” raptured before “the great tribulation” and unspiritual “Laodicea” left on earth.
    In Dec. 1830 John Darby (the so-called “father of dispensationalism” even though he wasn’t first on any crucial aspect of it!) was still defending the historic posttrib rapture view in the “Christian Herald.”
    Pretrib didn’t spring from a “church/Israel” dichotomy, as many have assumed, but sprang from a “church/church” one, as we’ve seen, and was based only on symbols!
    But innate anti-Jewishness soon appeared. (As noted, TMW in Sep. 1830 saw only less worthy church members left behind.) In Sep. 1832 TMW said that less worthy church members and “Jews” would be left behind. But by Mar. 1833 TMW was sure that only “Jews” would face the Antichrist!
    As late as 1837 the non-dichotomous Darby saw the church “going in with Him to the marriage, to wit, with Jerusalem and the Jews.” And he didn’t clearly teach pretrib until 1839. His basis then was the Rev. 12:5 “man child…caught up” symbol he’d “borrowed” (without giving credit) from Irving who had been the first to use it for the same purpose in 1831!
    For related articles Google “X-Raying Margaret,” “Edward Irving is Unnerving,” “Pretrib Rapture’s Missing Lines,” “The Unoriginal John Darby,” “Deceiving and Being Deceived” by D.M., “Pretrib Rapture Pride,” “Pretrib Rapture Dishonesty” and “Scholars Weigh My Research.” The most documented and accurate book on pretrib rapture history is “The Rapture Plot” (see Armageddon Books online) – a 300-pager that has hundreds of disarming facts (like the ones above) not found in any other source.

  5. Doug Says:

    Obviously Macarthur has misrepresented those who disagree with his views, particularly covenant theology. In reality they are not “spiritualizing” everything as he claims, but rather they are interpreting scripture in light of scripture and challenging the Biblical validity of teachings that have become popular over the years.

    And when we do that, we find very little evidence for many of these claims such as the notion that God has ordained for the Jews and Israel to have a seperate plan of salvation based on race. In fact many bible verses contradict the idea (Gal. 3:28-29, Luke 3:8, John 8:39). The entirety of Romans 9 through 11 is an expression if Paul’s longing for Hebrews to accept God’s new covenant, and many did. So clearly that is the “remnant”, if we follow the plain meaning of scripture. In Hebrews 10 the instructions given to Hebrew people is to not return to the old system of sacrifice, as such is said to be an affront to God. So why would God ordain a 3rd temple so they could do opposite of what the Bible says?

    Lastly, if we take a literal interpretation of Acts 1:7, Jesus clearly says we are not meant to know “times or seasons” when his disciples ask about his literal return. Later in the epistles we find that for all the importance placed on understsnding

  6. Doug Says:

    Sorry, last comment cut short. Point being if popular teachings about the 7 year tribulation were so important, would not the apostles have clearly stated them in their letters to these new churches? Could it be that they had never heard of them before? If we follow the solid literalist/fututist stance of hermeneutics used by Lehaye and Macarthur and apply it to Acts 1:7, it essentially is self refuting to almost all of their other presupossitions on the end times

  7. Douglas Says:

    Here is my question: if the popular teachings about the 7 year tribulation were so important, would not the apostles have clearly stated them in their letters to the new churches? Could it be that they had never heard of them before? If we follow the solid literalist/futurist stance of hermeneutics used by LaHaye and Macarthur and apply it to Acts 1:7, it essentially is self refuting to almost all of their other presupossitions on the end times. Here’s why:

    Even assuming the premillennislist view is true, Jesus gives an interesting response when the disciples ask when he will set up this kingdom (they still didn’t get it yet). He responds to their very literal question by literally saying “it is NOT for you to know the times and seasons”. Using the same hermeneutic style of staunch literalism and futurism (that the words were meant to be understood by a future generation, namely those alive during 1948/1967) Jesus would be saying that nobody at any time is meant to know the time or season of his return- including those alive during a supposed 7 year tribulation. Macarthur and others seem to let literalism and futurism slip on this passage, but not on other ones that they use to support their eschatology- their reasoning is not clear.

    I am now reading the apocalypse code by Hank Hanegraaff and weighing out different views. In the end the church must remember to BE the church Christ called us to be- salt and light. I don’t see how isolating one’s self from society and fantasizing about an apocalyptic holocoust with xenophobic excitement fits the desctiption if a disciple.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: