Darby, Dispensationalism, the Rapture and Understanding Conservative Christians

[Author’s note: part of this article is an excerpt from my book Jefferson’s Razor.]

I have heard people use the United States motto, “In God we trust,” and its placement on U.S. money, as supportive evidence that the Founding Fathers established a Christian nation. Hopefully, most now know that the adoption of “In God we trust” as the motto of the United States has only been in relatively recent years.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury website has a very good page on the History of “In God we trust” on U.S. money.

The motto IN GOD WE TRUST was placed on United States coins largely because of the increased religious sentiment existing during the Civil War. Secretary of the Treasury Salmon P. Chase received many appeals from devout persons throughout the country, urging that the United States recognize the Deity on United States coins. … The use of IN GOD WE TRUST has not been uninterrupted. … A law passed by the 84th Congress (P.L. 84-140) and approved by the President on July 30, 1956, the President approved a Joint Resolution of the 84th Congress, declaring IN GOD WE TRUST the national motto of the United States. IN GOD WE TRUST was first used on paper money in 1957, when it appeared on the one-dollar silver certificate. ^[1]

It wasn’t until 1956 that it was officially adopted as the motto of the United States, and started appearing on paper money, replacing “E pluribus unum,” which had been the unofficial motto of the U.S., since 1782, it appeared on the Great Seal of the U.S. So, if there was a motto established by the Founding Fathers, it was “E pluribus unum,” “Out of many, one.”

Just as many have believed that the motto of the U.S had been “In God we trust,” since the establishment of this nation, there are many who believe the same about a couple of key precepts of Christian doctrine, Dispensationalism and the Rapture.

It was John Nelson Darby, who created the concept of Dispensationalism, in an attempt to explain God’s inconsistent behavior in dealing with humankind throughout the biblical history. To Darby, it couldn’t be that biblical stories were allegorical and written by different men, who had different ways of forming the story. Darby interpreted the Bible in a very literal sense, so contradictions needed to be reconciled.

Apparent contradictions in the Bible are reconciled by their having occurred under different dispensations. Also, primitive or repugnant things (like Solomon’s polygamy) can be excused according to the dispensation, God accommodating his demands to different contractual relations with his people. In these and other ways, dispensationalism allowed for new sophistication and nuance within literal readings. ^[2]

A critical analysis of the Bible revealed contradictions and apparent differences in how God dealt and contracted with humans. The most obvious change in the covenant between man and God was in the time before Jesus and the time after Jesus. This was acknowledged even before dispensationalism, but Darby needed more divisions in biblical history to explain other contradictions. The scheme of dispensations allowed for God to operate under different rules of conduct and punishment, and would provide an explanation for the embarrassing and harsh passages of the Bible.

From Darby’s careful study of the Bible, he divided the history of the Bible into seven epochs or dispensations and each dispensation ended with God having no choice but punish people for their great wickedness. Seven is a reoccurring number in the Bible and so seven dispensations seemed to logically fit. According to Darby, man was living in the sixth dispensation that started with the death of Jesus and will end with the horrible destructions that were revealed in the Book of Revelations—the seventh dispensation, of course, being the millennial reign of Jesus over the righteous.

Below is a table of the seven dispensations. In each dispensation God instituted new tests for humans and humans invariably failed and became so wicked that God was forced to end the dispensation by punishing their wickedness with a catastrophe that would then usher in a new epoch of righteousness.

Table of Dispensations ^[3]

Not only did dispensationalism try to address contradictions in how God has dealt with humankind, it also provided an explanation for the contradictions in the End Time events.

He [Darby] put together in an economical scheme all the apparently conflicting sayings about the end time. In various places biblical texts say that there will be a last battle but that Christians will be spared it; that the Antichrist will be both reined in and released; that a great Trial (or tribulation) will occur, but also a great Reign of Saints. In what order, in what relationship to each other, are these things to happen?

Darby solved one set of nagging problems by getting the Christians out of the way right at the beginning of the final sequence. They would be swept up (rapt) before any of the other things occurred. This “secret rapture” was thus the first of the last things. ^[4]

Darby formulated the doctrine of the Rapture from a passage of the apostle Paul’s first letter to the Thessalonians. In this epistle, Paul is responding to the concerns that the Thessalian Christians had raised about Paul’s promise that they will be caught up into heaven without tasting death, when Jesus returned. Time had passed since the promise had been made and they were concerned about people who were dying. Paul believed and preached that the return of Jesus was imminent and all Christians living would not taste death, but people were dying, so he needed to provide and answer to belay their concerns.

For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep.

For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first:

Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. ^[5]

Around this single passage of Paul was Darby’s doctrine of the Rapture formulated, which solves the problem by getting the Christians out of the way before the sufferings of the Tribulation. It was Darby’s organization of the events of the Last Days by placing the event of the Second Coming and the Rapture as the first events to happen before the millennium that made conservative Christians predominantly premillennialists.

Between the American Revolution and the Civil War, postmillennialism was by far the more prevalent view among American evangelicals. During the first Great Awakening of the 18th century, Jonathan Edwards, most notably, brought postmillennialism to America. Premillennialism did not have many followers in England but found great success in the United States, as Darby toured the country six times between 1859 and 1877.

Darby not only changed the sequence of event, but he also changed how some Christian viewed the End Times. Central to premillennialist views is that the future of humanity is very bleak. There is only war, death, and destruction that is awaiting us. The modern world, in Darby’s view, had nothing good to offer the world. Darby’s interpretation of the Bible was literal. There was nothing mystical or symbolic within the Book of Revelations. For him, Revelations foretold actual events. Postmillennialists saw the events of the Last Days as being fulfilled in the current era and the Holy Spirit would be poured out and the gospel of Jesus would spread throughout the world, which would then usher in the millennial era and the Second Coming of Jesus. ^[6]

Premillennialists saw the Second Coming occurring at the start of the millennium and the Rapture happening at the onset of the Trial of the Tribulation. Therefore things had to get much worse before the Second Coming could occur. No matter what humans did, things were not going to get better. For postmillennialists, humans would help usher in the millennial reign of Jesus by spreading the Gospel, brokering peace, and improving human conditions.

Postmillennialism held a more optimistic view and “imagined human beings inaugurating God’s kingdom by their own efforts: Christ would only return to earth after the millennium was established.” ^[7] Postmillennialism gave hope that humanity would come together and establish peace on earth fit for the return of the Christ. Postmillennialism viewed the advancement of humanity as advancing the Kingdom of God. For Premillennialists this was a delusion, playing into Satan’s hands. This is the basic difference between the philosophies of the two groups. Premillennialists believed that there was nothing that humans could do to change the conditions of people and bring about the millennium. Wickedness was to get worse as the end of the dispensation drew nearer to its end and God’s eventual punishment. Only the righteous Christians would be spared in the Rapture. After the Rapture of the righteous, “It would be the assignment of others to oppose the Antichrist. Jew must lead this opposition, ‘coming back’ to God in a struggle that will convert to Christianity those it did not kill.” ^[8]

Postmillennialists saw that humans were active agents in their own future and in bringing about the millennium. Because of this philosophical difference, conservative Christians focused more on evangelism and the world to come, whereas the liberal Christians focused more on this world instead of the next. From this basic difference in philosophy, we can see how the activities of the two groups in society have diverged. These premillennial philosophies lead in part to the “Great Reversal,” where conservative Christians reversed on social concerns during the beginning of the 20th century.

From this shift in philosophy, we can understand why many conservative Christians are so opposed to programs or groups that focus on making life better and promotes peace in the world. Their philosophy is that it conditions in the world cannot get better. If it does, we are only playing into Satan’s hands and deluding ourselves. We also understand why they are also opposed to humanitarian and peace organizations such as the United Nations. Anything other than God’s kingdom is false and an instrument of the devil. This is one reason they use the dirty word “socialism” for any program that would make life better for the population, such as President Barack Obama’s Universal Heath Care program. You would think that Christians would be all for universal heath care for all. Indeed, there are a large number of Christians, who are, but I know of many conservative Christians, who are vehemently opposed it or any social program to help the less fortunate. This seems to be a contradiction, but in the light of Darby’s premillennialist ideas, it is now understandable, why they oppose it. Anything short of God establishing his kingdom on earth is a facsimile and is of the devil—things are only going to get worse not better.