David Jeremiah recently published a brief article on the (completely supposed!) difference between the (so-called) “rapture” and the (slightly more appropriately dubbed) second coming of Christ. Two seconds into reading it, I could not stop myself from asking: How is this still being advocated? How can people, in good conscience, continue to promote the bunk conclusions of Classical/Modified Dispensationalism? More problematic: why are people still believing things like this to be true? (Proof can found if you choose to enter the hell that is the comments section of the article).
I ask because, and to borrow from D. Jeremiah’s opening claim: the belief that there is a difference between the two is one of the biggest misconceptions in (popular) theology. Sorry, but the only way this type of (Classical/Modified) Dispensational drivel can be sustained if one throws proper exegetical procedures out the window and then willingly shackles himself/herself to eisegetical special pleading. Thus, when D. Jeremiah boldly declares, “Paul is talking about…” or “the Bible says…” before spouting off some theological truth that’s nothing more than the love-child of Scofield and Larkin, I have no hesitation in saying: σκύβαλον.