Looking for "Once more for those in the back."

“Once more for those in the back.”

By Christopher Preston

The recent segment on dispensationalism aired on Tucker Carlson’s show, featuring John Rich, was nothing short of embarrassing and utterly risible. While the platform gives it circulation, it’s crucial to dissect and address the points raised, many of which are based on misconceptions and mischaracterizations. There are valid critiques of dispensationalism; however, this segment failed to present any. Here’s a detailed examination of why the arguments presented were flawed. You can see the video here.

1. The Myth of the “Secret Rapture” A persistent error in critiques of dispensationalism is the term “secret rapture,” which is often used pejoratively. It appears to be a strawman argument employed by those who either misunderstand or intentionally misrepresent dispensationalist teachings. In my experience, no dispensational pastor or theologian refers to a “secret rapture.” This term is not found in dispensational literature or sermons, suggesting a fundamental misunderstanding by critics.

2. Misattributing the Rapture to Darby The claim that John Nelson Darby invented the concept of the rapture, or even the pre-tribulation rapture, is historically inaccurate. Figures such as Irenaeus, Victorinus, Ephraim the Syrian, William Sherwin, and John Gill, all predate Darby and reference the concept of believers being caught up to meet the Lord. While Darby systematized and popularized dispensationalism in the modern era, this does not invalidate the interpretations that predate him. Just as the formalization of Calvinism in the 17th century does not negate the doctrines of grace, the historical development of dispensationalism should not be dismissed on the grounds of its systematization by Darby.

3. The Absurdity of the “Rapture” Terminology Argument Critics often point out that the word “rapture” does not appear in the Bible, which is a shallow and misleading argument. The same logic would require us to discard terms like “Trinity,” “penal substitution,” or “sublapsarianism,” none of which appear in the biblical text. The term “rapture” originates from the Latin translation of 1 Thessalonians 4:17, where Paul states that believers will be “caught up” (Latin: rapturo) to meet the Lord. The concept is biblically sound, even if the specific term is not found in English translations. Similarly, the term “antichrist” does appear in the epistles of John, contrary to what was suggested in the segment.

4. Historical Inaccuracy about Study Bibles The assertion that the Scofield Study Bible was the first Bible with study notes is historically incorrect. The Geneva Bible, published in the 1500s, is renowned for its extensive study notes. The Scofield Bible did play a significant role in popularizing dispensationalism, but this (and any connection to the Rothschilds, or other conspiratorial claims) does not invalidate the scriptural interpretations characteristic of dispensationalism, which predate both Darby and Scofield.

5. Misconceptions about Tribulation and Complacency There is a widespread but mistaken belief that dispensationalists teach Christians will avoid all tribulation and hardship. This is not accurate. While the pre-tribulation view posits that the church will be raptured before a specific period of worldwide tribulation, it does not suggest that Christians will never face trials or persecution. The biblical call for believers to be salt and light remains, regardless of eschatological views. Furthermore, critics contradict themselves by simultaneously accusing dispensationalists of escapism and critiquing their perceived pessimism about the world’s state.

6. The Timing of Christ’s Return Rich’s critique regarding the signs of Christ’s return versus the doctrine of imminence as taught by Darby and Scofield misses the mark. Dispensationalism acknowledges both the signs preceding Christ’s return and the exhortations to be always ready. The appearing of Christ to gather His people to Himself in the air, is not preceded by any signs; however, the second coming of Christ onto earth is clearly preceded by certain signs. The pretribulational view is an explanation that accounts for this contrast.

7. Warning Against Complacency The segment rightly warns against complacency, a valid concern regardless of eschatological stance. Revelation emphasizes that genuine believers will resist idolatry and remain faithful, regardless of whether they face tribulation before or after the rapture. John’s Revelation serves as a timeless exhortation for all generations to resist the idolatry of statism, globalism, and materialism.

In conclusion, while it is important to critique and discuss theological views, it is equally important to do so accurately and fairly. The segment on Tucker Carlson’s show failed in this regard, relying on strawman arguments, historical inaccuracies, and misrepresentations. For meaningful discussions on dispensationalism, we must engage with current scholars and address their actual positions, rather than perpetuating outdated and erroneous critiques.

Show less