John Darby (1800-1882) is generally
credited as the first man to teach the idea that there would be a 7 year
tribulation period. Prior to Darby , there is no known record of anyone
claiming that the 7 years of Dan 9:27 outlines the length of the tribulation
period in the book of Revelation.
It's not that there aren't an abundance of
commentators. For example, all of the following people commented on the
End Times, the False Messiah, and other such topics:
-
The last chapter of the Didache
(circa 100-120 AD) outlines the events of the Second Coming, but
says nothing about a 7 year trib period.
-
Irenaeus (120-200 AD),
in Book V
Chapter XXV , quotes from Daniel to discuss the tribulations and
says the false messiah would reign for 3.5 years, and makes no mention of
any greater length of 7 years.
-
-
Cyprian
(200-258 AD) discusses the false messiah too in Letter 55 but
said nothing about a 7 year tribulation.
-
Victorinus
(circa 240 AD) wrote a Commentary on the entire
Book of Revelation, but not once did he mention anything about the
tribulation period being 7 years in length. There's a lot of SEVEN's
in the book of Revelation (7 churches, 7 trumpets, 7 seals) and as such, he
talks a lot about the symbolic meaning of the number 7 in his commentary on
the first chapter. But still, not once does he say anything about a 7
year period despite all of these opportunities and places where one would
expect such.
-
Ephraim the Syrian (4th
century AD) discusses the false messiah reigning for 3.5
years, but says nothing of any sort of 7 year tribulation period.
One could probably go through one example
after another and find similar results; one commentator after another from the
earliest times right on up to Darby had no notion of the End Times fitting
into some sort of 7 year time period. We even see the opposite , for all
of them talk about the false messiah reigning for only 3.5
years. Darby (19th century AD) is the first person history
knows of to suggest that the entire tribulation period would fit into some
sort of 7 year period.
Now yesterday FM Riley claimed that ,
"God’s people [true believers] throughout this present dispensation
have always taught a future seven year
Tribulation. " This is just simply not true. And
if someone wants to allege such a thing, then I would like to challenge them
to find me someone who, prior to John Darby, taught a 7 year tribulation
period. If Darby got the idea from an earlier source, I'd like to
know. But none of the earliest writers seem to know anything about
it. It's a post-Nicean concept that's for sure, because none of the
pre-Nicean writers had anything to say about it.
I even checked out what Isaac Newton
(1642-1727) wrote about Daniel today and he wrote a very extensive commentary
on Daniel trying to correlate the events in Daniel with historical
events. He mentions nothing of a 7 year trib period and he enterpreted
the 7 years of Daniel 9:27 as ending in Acts 10 when the Cornelius, who was
among first Gentile believers, accepted the Gospel!
Furthermore, he also said, "The “interpretation” of Daniel 9:26-27 which has
been traditionally taught by all true believers right through
the centuries is completely vindicated. The debate is
over!" to be highly objectionable. It's as if
you're calling into question the salvation of anyone who is less than
convinced that all of Revelation has to fit into some sort of 7 year time
frame. The debate is not over, and no, "all true
believers right through the centuries" did not teach this. In
fact, most "true believers right through the "
first 19 "centuries" never heard of the idea.
Fast forward to today, and there are so
many Protestant pastors that teach Darbyism (the 7 year Trib theory), that
most of them have no clue that this is not universally accepted by all
Christians in all parts of the world. They have no clue that the idea is
unheard of in pre-19th century writings. they just assume "Everybody
knows this" when in reality no one heard of it until John Darby in the 19th
century.
Now maybe if someone had sat down and
COUNTED THE CLUES, such as the 1st woe being at least 5 months long, the
second woe streching into at least part of a 43rd month, and the 3rd woe being
42 months long, Darbyism may not have gotten started and Darby would have seen
the error of his ways. But some people are so hung up on the traditions
they have already accepted that even when you show them PROOF FROM SCRIPTURE
that in the form of 2 + 2 = 4, or in this case 5 + 43 + 42 = 90 > 7 years,
they still don't believe what is obvious from the plain ink because they have
held that idea in their mind, and any idea that is believed true for more than
3 days will never go away with some people. For some folks its any idea
over 2 weeks. Some people are more set in their ways than
others. But let's pay attention to what Scripture says, and
not what Darby or other man-made doctrines have to say, and maybe Prophecy
will start making a lot more sense to us. And when a doctrine "doesn't
add up", like this one doesn't, then let's just face that fact that the only
timeline we can put on the trib period is that it will be at LEAST 90 months
(7.5 years), probably more, but we don't know EXACTLY how long because there
are tribulation events who's time isn't counted. All we can do is put a
minimum figure on how long it will last, not an exact figure on
it.
Shalom, Joe