Twister: Caught In the Storm

[Arial]

The title of the OP is the title of a documentary I watched today on Netflix. It had in it the account of one survivor that brought up a very frightening scenario.

A massive tornado tore through Joplin, MO in May of 2011. A town at the center of the Bible Belt. One of the persons filmed was gay, but also claimed to be Christian. And that is not where this OP is going. That is in God's hands. Someone (I don't remember his name or position) had been predicting that the world would end on a certain day in May, which happened to be before the day of this tornado. Much of Joplin was talking about this, mostly in derision and it was quite the butt of many a joke when the world didn't end on that day.

But to get to the point. This one person, I will call him Dale since I never registered his name, was caught sheltering in a diner when the tornado hit. Everything was destroyed around him, but he survived. It was a harrowing experience and during it he decided that this was the rapture (pre-trib, premil, rapture). He saw people rising up off the ground and going into the sky and disappearing. When the storm passed, he stood up and looked around at a world without trees or houses, just rubble, and an eerily colored sky in the wake of the storm. He was all alone. The only man standing. He sincerely and genuinely thought the rapture had occurred and God didn't take him because he was gay. He thought this for a long time, because he said he walked for miles, looking for his mother, believing she had been taken in the rapture. He only realized it wasn't the rapture when he did find her.

I try to imagine what that would feel like to find myself in any scene of such destruction and think the rapture had occurred and I was left standing, or that it was occurring while all around me was shattered to pieces. I can't. But what are we doing to our children when we teach them something that has no biblical soundness to it?

What we have in probably the majority of our churches today is that pre-trib, premil, rapture teaching. It is taught with authority and as an indisputable fact. It is supported by selective Bible passages isolated from the full counsel of God. No other possibilities are considered or examined. It is promoted by those we should be able to trust, famous preachers, J MacArthur and Hal Lindsey among them. This has been going on since Darby first brought it into the open in the 1830's. All generations since have been inundated with it. Generation after generation who knows nothing else. And we can see from what happened to "Dale" in the tornado, how deeply it sinks into the psyche of a person, so that removing it is next to impossible. It is as though their very Christianity depends centrally on that one belief. It is a hill they are willing to die on.

And as I said, there is no sound biblical support for it. If any wish to dispute that and give their sound biblical support you have the floor. But please don't use a quoted scripture here and another there, removing them from the surrounding context and the full counsel of God. And by the full counsel of God I mean, make sure they don't contradict anything else.

 

[makesends]

There was a time when I was in my teens, when I was terrified the Lord would return and leave me behind, because my mind well knew I was not faithful to my commitment to Christ. I was not able to sleep till after midnight, every night. For some reason, even though I knew midnight was of no special significance, when the clock struck 12, it meant I had made it safe through another day, and a new day was beginning. And even then, I would count every stroke of the clock until it made no more sound, before I could rest.

 

[Arial]

There was a time when I was in my teens, when I was terrified the Lord would return and leave me behind, because my mind well knew I was not faithful to my commitment to Christ. I was not able to sleep till after midnight, every night. For some reason, even though I knew midnight was of no special significance, when the clock struck 12, it meant I had made it safe through another day, and a new day was beginning. And even then, I would count every stroke of the clock until it made no more sound, before I could rest.

It would also be terrifying to think of what would happen if all believers suddenly left the earth. And "Well I wouldn't be here." is kind of a selfish and cold way to look at it. When I used to believe that rapture thing, I was worried about my dogs being left alone in the house without me or food or water. There was a time I thought I probably wouldn't go in the rapture because I wasn't sinless enough. That didn't scare me but I figured I would fight til my last breath before I would take the mark.

It is a skewed teaching that pre-mil , dispensation, rapture stuff. And damaging I think, not to just persons, but Christianity.

 

[makesends]

It is a skewed teaching that pre-mil , dispensation, rapture stuff. And damaging I think, not to just persons, but Christianity.

Yep. And, it provides cannon fodder to those who want to say religion is harmful to young people, and some even say, harmful to self-esteem (as if self-esteem should be dependent on the intrinsic value of a human apart from God)

 

[TMSO]

The title of the OP is the title of a documentary I watched today on Netflix. It had in it the account of one survivor that brought up a very frightening scenario.

A massive tornado tore through Joplin, MO in May of 2011. A town at the center of the Bible Belt. One of the persons filmed was gay, but also claimed to be Christian. And that is not where this OP is going. That is in God's hands. Someone (I don't remember his name or position) had been predicting that the world would end on a certain day in May, which happened to be before the day of this tornado. Much of Joplin was talking about this, mostly in derision and it was quite the butt of many a joke when the world didn't end on that day.

But to get to the point. This one person, I will call him Dale since I never registered his name, was caught sheltering in a diner when the tornado hit. Everything was destroyed around him, but he survived. It was a harrowing experience and during it he decided that this was the rapture (pre-trib, premil, rapture). He saw people rising up off the ground and going into the sky and disappearing. When the storm passed, he stood up and looked around at a world without trees or houses, just rubble, and an eerily colored sky in the wake of the storm. He was all alone. The only man standing. He sincerely and genuinely thought the rapture had occurred and God didn't take him because he was gay. He thought this for a long time, because he said he walked for miles, looking for his mother, believing she had been taken in the rapture. He only realized it wasn't the rapture when he did find her.

I try to imagine what that would feel like to find myself in any scene of such destruction and think the rapture had occurred and I was left standing, or that it was occurring while all around me was shattered to pieces. I can't. But what are we doing to our children when we teach them something that has no biblical soundness to it?

What we have in probably the majority of our churches today is that pre-trib, premil, rapture teaching. It is taught with authority and as an indisputable fact. It is supported by selective Bible passages isolated from the full counsel of God. No other possibilities are considered or examined. It is promoted by those we should be able to trust, famous preachers, J MacArthur and Hal Lindsey among them. This has been going on since Darby first brought it into the open in the 1830's. All generations since have been inundated with it. Generation after generation who knows nothing else. And we can see from what happened to "Dale" in the tornado, how deeply it sinks into the psyche of a person, so that removing it is next to impossible. It is as though their very Christianity depends centrally on that one belief. It is a hill they are willing to die on.

And as I said, there is no sound biblical support for it. If any wish to dispute that and give their sound biblical support you have the floor. But please don't use a quoted scripture here and another there, removing them from the surrounding context and the full counsel of God. And by the full counsel of God I mean, make sure they don't contradict anything else.

You should do research. Darby isn't the first. Darby did not simply create beliefs out of thin air. There is historical precedent for a rapture going back to the 5th-8th centuries. The idea behind the rapture, and other ideas, is that the ECFs did not believe that God was going to pour out His great wrath on the church. We aren't talking about simple punishment or judgment, but God's unflinching wrath. It isn't meant to chastise, it isn't meant to punish, it is meant to destroy. The rapture, or the idea of a translation to another place has been around for a long time, even if it wasn't expounded upon. Granted, the ECFs leaned towards 3 1/2 years and not 7.

 

[Hazelelponi]

The title of the OP is the title of a documentary I watched today on Netflix. It had in it the account of one survivor that brought up a very frightening scenario.

A massive tornado tore through Joplin, MO in May of 2011. A town at the center of the Bible Belt. One of the persons filmed was gay, but also claimed to be Christian. And that is not where this OP is going. That is in God's hands. Someone (I don't remember his name or position) had been predicting that the world would end on a certain day in May, which happened to be before the day of this tornado. Much of Joplin was talking about this, mostly in derision and it was quite the butt of many a joke when the world didn't end on that day.

But to get to the point. This one person, I will call him Dale since I never registered his name, was caught sheltering in a diner when the tornado hit. Everything was destroyed around him, but he survived. It was a harrowing experience and during it he decided that this was the rapture (pre-trib, premil, rapture). He saw people rising up off the ground and going into the sky and disappearing. When the storm passed, he stood up and looked around at a world without trees or houses, just rubble, and an eerily colored sky in the wake of the storm. He was all alone. The only man standing. He sincerely and genuinely thought the rapture had occurred and God didn't take him because he was gay. He thought this for a long time, because he said he walked for miles, looking for his mother, believing she had been taken in the rapture. He only realized it wasn't the rapture when he did find her.

I try to imagine what that would feel like to find myself in any scene of such destruction and think the rapture had occurred and I was left standing, or that it was occurring while all around me was shattered to pieces. I can't. But what are we doing to our children when we teach them something that has no biblical soundness to it?

What we have in probably the majority of our churches today is that pre-trib, premil, rapture teaching. It is taught with authority and as an indisputable fact. It is supported by selective Bible passages isolated from the full counsel of God. No other possibilities are considered or examined. It is promoted by those we should be able to trust, famous preachers, J MacArthur and Hal Lindsey among them. This has been going on since Darby first brought it into the open in the 1830's. All generations since have been inundated with it. Generation after generation who knows nothing else. And we can see from what happened to "Dale" in the tornado, how deeply it sinks into the psyche of a person, so that removing it is next to impossible. It is as though their very Christianity depends centrally on that one belief. It is a hill they are willing to die on.

And as I said, there is no sound biblical support for it. If any wish to dispute that and give their sound biblical support you have the floor. But please don't use a quoted scripture here and another there, removing them from the surrounding context and the full counsel of God. And by the full counsel of God I mean, make sure they don't contradict anything else.

I think you're right, but there's something else needing considered outside of strict correctness of Scriptural interpretations.

Have you noticed the when, of when people are drawn to prophecy itself? It's always when we need God the most on a personal level, I have noticed. It's not when things are fine spiritually, it's when we desperately need Him in Spirit and in Truth.

The young man was in a panic - the situation itself heart stopping - and he had an overwhelming feeling that he wasn't ready to stand in God's presence, so overwhelming he thought himself for a time completely unsaved.

We can argue the prophecy itself is wrong but I am not sure that God doesn't still use even what's wrong to let us know it's Him we need.

That young man got a wake up call, let's pray He uses it so that He can stand when His time comes. The one thing we should all be sure of is that we can stand, because as my husband likes to say, the end of the world is every day for someone.

 

[Arial]

You should do research. Darby isn't the first. Darby did not simply create beliefs out of thin air. There is historical precedent for a rapture going back to the 5th-8th centuries.

For one thing I did not say he was the first did I? I said."Since Darby first brought it into the open." For another, the assumption that you disagreeing with me is indicative of me not having done any research is quite a leap.

Granted, the ECFs leaned towards 3 1/2 years and not 7

That was a debate over the length of the "tribulation" not about a pre-trib rapture. And it is wrong to presume that the ECF's are always right simply because they were closer in time to the writers of the NT.

But here is some information for you.
davidruybalid.wordpress.com/2023/02/16/the-rapture-doctrine-its-origin-and-evolution-in-christian-theology/

 

[Eleanor]

You should do research. Darby isn't the first. Darby did not simply create beliefs out of thin air. There is historical precedent for a rapture going back to the 5th-8th centuries. The idea behind the rapture, and other ideas, is that the ECFs did not believe that God was going to pour out His great wrath on the church. We aren't talking about simple punishment or judgment, but God's unflinching wrath. It isn't meant to chastise, it isn't meant to punish, it is meant to destroy. The rapture, or the idea of a translation to another place has been around for a long time, even if it wasn't expounded upon. Granted, the ECFs leaned towards 3 1/2 years and not 7.

It's really quite simple. . .apostolic teaching is that the second coming, resurrection and rapture occur at the end of time (1 Th 4:16-17).

Where do we find 3 1/2 or 7 in the ECF's?

 

[TMSO]

For one thing I did not say he was the first did I? I said."Since Darby first brought it into the open." For another, the assumption that you disagreeing with me is indicative of me not having done any research is quite a leap.

There are a lot of people who haven't done any research. The fact that you keep mentioning Darby seems to lean in that direction. And I am speaking of a specific scope of research, which is the rapture. Have you read Psuedo Ephraim? A translation of it is considered to be one of the earlier, if not earliest mentions of a rapture, going back as early as the 5th century. It is also an eye opening read. It casts a light on the ECFs beliefs of what the abomination of desolation is. When you consider it in light of what is happening today, one has to question the possibility that prophecy is unfolding before us right now. For instance, in studying eschatology, one of the thing seen is the drying up of the Euphrates River. I believe they say that that could be as soon/late as 2040, as it has been receding for some time.

That was a debate over the length of the "tribulation" not about a pre-trib rapture. And it is wrong to presume that the ECF's are always right simply because they were closer in time to the writers of the NT.

When speaking of the rapture at all, one has to deal with the length of the tribulation. There is pre-trib, mid-trib, post-trib beliefs of the rapture. However, it goes even deeper then that, as eschatology is a study of the end times. It is dealing with prophecy, not doctrine, however, it does include certain things that one may consider a statement of who God is. The rapture is way that the church, through history, has dealt with God, the church, and the outpouring of God's wrath. Some/many? of the church fathers did not believe that God would pour out His damning wrath on the church, His children. The rapture, or some kind of translation, is one of the ways that they came up with as a way God would shield/remove the church from His wrath. Since the abomination of desolation occurs 3 1/2 years into the final week, the ECFs spoke to 3 1/2 years of God's wrath. The last week is still seven years, but, given how it unfolds in Daniel, only the last 3 1/2 years is the full outpouring of God's wrath. I am ambivalent to both pre-trib rapture, and a mid-trib or pre-wrath rapture.

But here is some information for you.
davidruybalid.wordpress.com/2023/02/16/the-rapture-doctrine-its-origin-and-evolution-in-christian-theology/

I did some research, but mostly to see that the rapture goes back, even as far as the 5th century. It wasn't as developed/evolved as it is now, but it was there. If I had any point it is that it did not develop in a vacuum. It has a historic tradition in the church, unlike preterism, which is probably the only eschatological belief that has no historic tradition in the church. It is also an eschatological belief that actually was created by a Jesuit. (As a means to lure protestants back into the Catholic Church during the counter reformation...)

 

[TMSO]

But here is some information for you.
davidruybalid.wordpress.com/2023/02/16/the-rapture-doctrine-its-origin-and-evolution-in-christian-theology/

This is dealing only with the above. There are problems in what is written, though it may just be my knowledge. For instance Matthew 24 is NOT JUST about Jerusalem's destruction. It is about three questions asked by the disciples. The last verses are not dealing with the rapture, and are also not dealing with the destruction at Jerusalem. The last part of the Olivet discourse in Matthew is about Judgement Day. The FINAL judgment before the book is finally closed on this creation. It is a presentation of how it will be. It is the answer to the disciples question to signs of the final end. (From Greek, the consummation of this Age. The complete and final end, where everything comes together.) Jesus gave no signs, because He had no signs to give. This day is specifically known only by the Father. All Jesus said was, life will be going on as usual (using Noah's day prior to the rain falling and the flood coming) and then... it's over. Judgment begins and this Age ends.

The argument for I Thessalonians is weak. If the main point you have is "However, this term is not necessarily indicative of a rapture event, as it can also be interpreted as a metaphorical description of a grand procession. This phrase does not necessarily imply that believers are being taken away to heaven, as the language could also suggest a meeting between the Lord and his people."

That is weak when one can look back on prophecy in history and see that they weren't being metaphorical. Figurative speech and symbolism, but the event discussed is literal. Also, there is a meeting between the Lord and his people LITERALLY, as it says "in the air". Look at the whole context:
"Brothers and sisters, we do not want you to be uninformed about those who sleep in death, so that you do not grieve like the rest of mankind, who have no hope. 14 For we believe that Jesus died and rose again, and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in him. 15 According to the Lord’s word, we tell you that we who are still alive, who are left until the coming of the Lord, will certainly not precede those who have fallen asleep. 16 For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. 17 After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air. And so we will be with the Lord forever. 18 Therefore encourage one another with these words.

The key words here are "And so we will be with the Lord forever". Just what is covered by the word "so"? As such? That would mean in the air. No longer a part of this Earth. Also, it isn't a focus on those who went to sleep, other then to say, don't worry, God isn't going to leave them. In fact, they will go up before you. You don't get a 6 foot head start.

This is no definitive "this is the rapture", however, the argument given does nothing to stop it from being such. In fact, the argument against given here, is weaker then the argument for. (That does NOT, does NOT denote right or wrong. Just a weak argument.)

 

[TMSO]

It's really quite simple. . .apostolic teaching is that the second coming, resurrection and rapture occur at the end of time (1 Th 4:16-17).

Where do we find 3 1/2 or 7 in the ECF's?

You would have to do the research. You can try Irenaeus or Ignatius. There were others. There was even an Early Church Father who said that the one who held back the evil one was the Roman Empire. His statement was that he basically considered it ironic that the church was basically told/commanded by the apostles to pray for all authorities, and he found it ironic to pray for the very thing that holds back Jesus' second coming, the Roman Empire. (The evil one is revealed before Jesus' return.) In history, the Roman Empire did not end until the Turks took Constantinople in 1453.

 

[Arial]

The argument for I Thessalonians is weak. If the main point you have is "However, this term is not necessarily indicative of a rapture event, as it can also be interpreted as a metaphorical description of a grand procession. This phrase does not necessarily imply that believers are being taken away to heaven, as the language could also suggest a meeting between the Lord and his people."

I do not know what the argument in the linked article is. That is not why I posted the link to you and if what you posted is what the article has to say about Thess, it is not the way I see it. This was the purpose of the link and because you had denied what I said about Darby.



John Nelson Darby:
The concept of the Rapture, a central doctrine in many American evangelical and fundamentalist circles (though it is not central within Christian history globally), has its roots in the Dispensationalist teachings of John Nelson Darby, a prominent Christian preacher in the 19th century. Dispensationalism is a theological system that divides history into distinct periods or “dispensations,” each with its own unique characteristics and requirements for how God interacts with humanity. (etc.etc.)

 

[fastfredy0]

I gave up on the specifics of future events. So many theories. I wouldn't be surprised they are all wrong if you get detailed.

The rapture interpretation is the most entertaining eschatological interpretation ... i.e. best plot line for a story/movie

Daniel's 70 weeks is another difficult one to understand. Seems everything goes on schedule using human's understanding of a calendar ... then you get to the 70th week and they say the clock is stopped for awhile. Golly, I don't like watches that stop. (aside: been a while since I looked into this so my memory of the facts may be off. Parables is another area that has many interpretations for each parable. Matt.13:10 Then the disciples came to Him and asked, “Why do You speak to the crowds in parables?” 11 Jesus replied to them, “To you it has been granted to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been granted. )

 

[Eleanor]

You would have to do the research. You can try Irenaeus or Ignatius. There were others. There was even an Early Church Father who said that the one who held back the evil one was the Roman Empire. His statement was that he basically considered it ironic that the church was basically told/commanded by the apostles to pray for all authorities, and he found it ironic to pray for the very thing that holds back Jesus' second coming, the Roman Empire. (The evil one is revealed before Jesus' return.) In history, the Roman Empire did not end until the Turks took Constantinople in 1453.

I don't think it is really there. . .that came much later.

 

[Arial]

You would have to do the research. You can try Irenaeus or Ignatius. There were others. There was even an Early Church Father who said that the one who held back the evil one was the Roman Empire. His statement was that he basically considered it ironic that the church was basically told/commanded by the apostles to pray for all authorities, and he found it ironic to pray for the very thing that holds back Jesus' second coming, the Roman Empire. (The evil one is revealed before Jesus' return.) In history, the Roman Empire did not end until the Turks took Constantinople in 1453.

It is completely irrelevant unless you start your own thread dedicated to the subject of the ECF and the rapture. The mention of Darby in the OP is in relation to the current day and the beliefs that came out of his teaching. That is the source of that heresy coming into the modern church and for all intents and purposes, overtaking it thanks to the promotion of it by Hal Lindsey, the Left Behind novels. It is like @fastfredy0 said, it is the most entertaining for books and movies.

 

[Arial]

There are a lot of people who haven't done any research. The fact that you keep mentioning Darby seems to lean in that direction.

The reason I mention Darby is because of research. I qualified the statement with "first brought it into the open". That is a provable fact so why are you trying to argue from a different premise. Nothing that may or may not have happened in the 5th century changes that in any way. The teaching of a seven year tribulation and a rapture prior to that or in the middle of it, cannot be supported by the Bible unless one deliberately makes it appear to do so, by leaving out a whole lot of the rest of the full counsel of God. And this is not the thread to get into it at that level. Darby is not the subject of the OP, the danger and damage his teaching causes, is.

 

[TMSO]

I do not know what the argument in the linked article is. That is not why I posted the link to you and if what you posted is what the article has to say about Thess, it is not the way I see it. This was the purpose of the link and because you had denied what I said about Darby.

Why wouldn't you read the article first. 1. It isn't long. 2. You would understand what I mean when I say the argument is weak. Again, I am not saying what they are saying is wrong, but the argument they make is weak, while the Dispensationalists have a much stronger argument. He also completely misrepresented the Olivet Discourse, further weakening the arguments.

John Nelson Darby:
The concept of the Rapture, a central doctrine in many American evangelical and fundamentalist circles (though it is not central within Christian history globally), has its roots in the Dispensationalist teachings of John Nelson Darby, a prominent Christian preacher in the 19th century. Dispensationalism is a theological system that divides history into distinct periods or “dispensations,” each with its own unique characteristics and requirements for how God interacts with humanity. (etc.etc.)

Now, again, the rapture does NOT find its roots in the teachings of Darby. That is why I say that you should do some research. Then you would stop commenting with falsehoods. The rapture has had some for of existence within the church, whether accepted or not, for over a millennia. Much further back then preterism, which doesn't even have a historic tradition within the church. Futurism has a historic tradition in that it is premillennial. The future part is added to that, but it is premillennial which has a historic tradition going back to the 1st/2nd century, and actually back into the Old Testament. Amillennialism has a historic tradition going back to St. Augustine, who came up with it because he had a falling out with the premillennialists of the day.

One of the copies of the Pseudo Ephraim, which is dated as between the 5th and 8th centuries, speaks of the rapture, not as the rapture in using the word rapture, but as a gathering up. When reading what it says, it is speaking of a rapture. There are other versions of the pseudo Ephraim that do not have this, but the fact that there is a manuscript dating back to that time frame that has it, means that the idea existed in some form within the church. Again, I said that the rapture is one of the ways presented for God separating the church from His wrath. There were other ways that existed throughout church history as well. One of the things used by those who spoke of a rapture of sorts is the 10 plagues in Egypt, where God eventually, before His wrath was poured out on Egypt, put a separation between Egypt and Goshen. So for some (all?) church fathers, this is a cause for consideration/reflection, considering we are talking about God pouring His wrath upon the world, and they believed God would not pour out His wrath on His adopted children.

 

[TMSO]

It is completely irrelevant unless you start your own thread dedicated to the subject of the ECF and the rapture. The mention of Darby in the OP is in relation to the current day and the beliefs that came out of his teaching. That is the source of that heresy coming into the modern church and for all intents and purposes, overtaking it thanks to the promotion of it by Hal Lindsey, the Left Behind novels. It is like @fastfredy0 said, it is the most entertaining for books and movies.

So, as far as I am aware, there are no beliefs that simply came out of his teaching, if you actually look into how he came up with his beliefs. Kind of like how Calvin took scripture and Augustinian beliefs, among other historic tradition, in forming/presenting his beliefs. Darby spent time studying scripture, and church beliefs. Consider that someone else presented a dispensational like treatise on eschatology before Darby came up with his beliefs. There is a historical tradition. Just as amillennialism has a historic tradition, and preterism DOES NOT. Darby is just the one who systematized beliefs that already existed. Not to mention one can actually find the word dispensation in the Bible, used as he uses it.

The rapture is not a heresy, it is a teaching that has been shown to quite possibly have scriptural support. You presented a weak argument through a link that was much weaker then the Dispensational argument. (Quite a bit weaker, actually.) I still haven't decided where I fall, because, having looked into some of what the ECFs had to say, I have opened up to the possibility of a mid-trib, or pre-wrath rapture. God removing the church prior to Him inundating the world with His divine wrath. That wrath which would wipe out all life on Earth, other than His being merciful and cutting it short. This isn't persecution, or simple tribulation, but God's wrath. That which is not the destiny of a child of God.

 

[TMSO]

I don't think it is really there. . .that came much later.

For the rapture, look up brother Dolcino, who taught of the rapture during the middle ages. (Prior to the 14th century.) It was actually rather developed as well. The belief was that his followers would be raptured prior to the tribulation, and would spend the tribulation in paradise. Once the tribulation ended, God would send them back to be missionaries and ambassadors for Him, to those still alive. (Something like that.) So they didn't teach a rapture to heaven, but a separation between his followers and the tribulation/wrath falling upon the world. They would not face the wrath of God.

 

[TMSO]

The reason I mention Darby is because of research. I qualified the statement with "first brought it into the open". That is a provable fact so why are you trying to argue from a different premise. Nothing that may or may not have happened in the 5th century changes that in any way. The teaching of a seven year tribulation and a rapture prior to that or in the middle of it, cannot be supported by the Bible unless one deliberately makes it appear to do so, by leaving out a whole lot of the rest of the full counsel of God. And this is not the thread to get into it at that level. Darby is not the subject of the OP, the danger and damage his teaching causes, is.

Brother Dolcino was rather open about his beleif in a rapture. He lived so long ago though that there aren't many records left. However, in another comment you said that unless I talk about Darby and his belief of the rapture infiltrating the church, I should start another thread. So how does that mean that Darby is not the subject of the OP? I would say the heresy of preterism is much more dangerous and damaging. There is a reason why preterism is considered a heresy. It actually changes the nature of Christ and the gospel. Unless you all of a sudden believe in a works based salvation and believe that interpretations of prophecy completely control the destination of one's soul, I don't see how it is any more dangerous and damaging then amillennialism.