Assignment for Schools: TEACH

Fandango’s Provocative question #104:
What do you think is the one subject (or thing) that should be taught in school that isn’t?

Since this touches on one of my big concerns, I’ll post a response. The Ragtag Daily Prompt this morning, ASSIGNMENT, should fit into this topic quite nicely.

One day I was checking out at the local supermarket and the clerk asked if I’d like to donate some money toward the literacy program in local schools. “To help students learn to read.”

I was puzzled. “Isn’t that what they do in school?” I asked. She looked at me blankly; maybe she thought I was, like, totally out of it – which I am when it comes to today’s education.

Another time a friend told me that her niece was in Grade Three and couldn’t even spell the word “ARE.” She only knew the text-speak “R.” Fifteen years ago I listened to a group of about twenty grown-in-Canada adults under thirty puzzle over what country Ottawa is in.

For the past century or so, our schools have been places to try out social experiments in education. One of these was to eliminate phonics. Ontario, thirty-some years back, went even further and abolished the teaching of grammar, because having to obey rules hinders the free flow of the student’s thoughts. “We want them to be creative, not slowed down by following all the rules.”

A few years ago a teen told me students aren’t “on the same page” when it comes to studying literature. That is, there’s no novel to study and assess together. Students pick a book they want to read and then discuss it in class. Since no one else has read the same book, do you hear any other opinion than your own?

Back in 1987 the Southam News Agency shocked us all with the results of their nation-wide study on literacy in Canada: 24% of Canadians are functionally illiterate. To determine “literacy” the subjects were given reading and writing assignments as well as having to read bank statements, time schedules, and calculate the change you’d get at a store.

Immigrant or native-born didn’t make much difference. One of every three Grade 8 graduates and one of every twelve Grade 12 grads were functionally illiterate in day-to-day affairs. The study found that many students entering universities had to take remedial reading classes.

A study done in 1989 shows that 20% of Canadians have strong literacy skills. This is a diverse group of people who exhibit a broad range of reading skills and various strategies for dealing with complex material. These people can meet most reading demands and handle new reading challenges.

A report in 2020 laments that, although public interest in literacy was strong between 1980 and 2000… “Against this background, it is surprising that the Canadian literacy infrastructure was subsequently largely dismantled.”
From a report by the European Journal for Research on the Education and Learning of Adults, Vol.11, No.1, 2020, pp. 109-125.

Apart from the need to teach better Reading, Writing, Grammar, Literature, and Math skills in Canadian schools, I think our children need to learn some HISTORY. Not the dates part so much, but basic concepts of social history: something about the Colonial days, Victorian Times, the Wars, the Roaring Twenties, the Dirty Thirties, the Cold War.

I wish our children could learn enough history to help them understand how other people have lived on this earth and gone through tough times, too. That people once entertained different ideas, upheld various ideals that were valid. That peer pressure is nothing new. That Covid-19 isn’t the worst plague ever. I’d like to see them get a good general history of the world that would bring them through time to where we are now. It would bring them down to earth and ground them – and hopefully generate more appreciation for our privileged era.

The Peril of a Great Name

Today’s Word of the Day Challenge from Kristian is FIGMENT, as in FIGMENT of your IMAGINATION. Well, here’s one. 🙂

“When I Win the Lottery…”

How many times have you heard someone say this? I have. And I’ve read about people who did win the lottery, how it played out for them. I gather it does wonders for what people think of, or expect from, you.

If you were to win a lottery, your reputation for wealth would spread far and wide. If you win the lottery, you’ll have long lost relatives who remember you, show up and want to be fed. You’ll have the most sincere wanna-be friends with pressing needs who need to borrow “…just a few bucks. Come on, you have so much.” Sales people of all kinds will be trying to get their foot in your door.

Years back a couple in our town won the lottery and she kept on working at her sales job, one she really enjoyed. But some people resented that. “She’s got all that money now and she’s taking a job away from someone who needs it!” To avoid all these things, some lottery winners have had to move to a place where nobody knew them.

Yes, winning the lottery is a mixed blessing & curse.

And America Has Won the Lottery!

A few decades ago, back in Ontario, a tractor-trailer outfit (a.k.a. a semi) stopped on the weigh scale on the Canadian border, heading into Detroit. The log book said the truck was empty, and the trucker said the same, but Canadian Customs officers were suspicious. Their scale was telling them this “empty” truck weighed more than it should.

They insisted he open the trailer and let them have a look inside… And what to their wondering eyes did appear…
but two dozen people (give or take). People who barely spoke English. Who carried Polish ID + passports.

An Imaginary Figment

Frowning Customs agents turned to the trucker for an explanation and he admitted these people have paid him to smuggle them into the US. “They seem to believe America is so rich that money is just lying around on the streets,” he explained. “So they flew to Canada as visitors and hired me to take them into the States. They want to pick up some of this money that’s lying around.”

The Polish folks were sent home – probably under the allusion that they were so close to riches and weren’t allowed to get their hands on any. And, trying to make a quick buck, the Canadian trucker was charged with smuggling human cargo.

I think of this incident whenever I read comments about how America should open her doors to the poor and needy of other lands. With the fantastic reputation she now has, there’d be standing room only! I think if you go to just about any nation and ask around, people will tell you, “Of course we’re poor compared to those rich Americans.”

Image: DarkmoonArt_de — Pixabay

Easy Money to Be Made! Just Get In

Some people do know that money doesn’t just lie around on the streets, but they still have a pretty rosy image. I was talking to a friend lately, someone who’s lived in Mexico and, with her husband, makes frequent trips there still. She tells me that a lot of Mexicans have the same impression of America: everyone there is rich. If you can get into the States you’ll only have to work a bit and the money will come flowing in. I’m sure the reality is a shock.

There was a time when America meant hard work. It was a new world, with forests to chop down and land to clear, railroads to build, factories to work in. As she prospered, her reputation for wealth increased. People in other lands now believe Americans all have great jobs and yachts and vacations around the world. From what they see, money obviously comes easy in the US. And some American writers are quick to support this thinking.

One blogger, quoting the plaque on the Statue of Liberty, felt that the States should just open the borders and let people come. Lots of room! Lots of jobs! Another article writer claims the US has room for a hundred times more people that what are living there now. (Mind you, this writer said nothing about where all these newcomers would find work. A lot of manufactured goods seem to be coming from overseas these days.)

I get the impression that many Americans — those who blog and write articles — are saying, “America is so rich. We can share.” (Or rather, “Our govt can share.”) That seems to be the “Haves” perspective. Those folks with good jobs or pensions, those who’ve won their share of the American lottery and are enjoying it.

Unlike those hopeful Poles, I’ve been in the States, seen enough places, and read enough that I realize there’s a major “Have Not” section in the US, too. So how do the Have Nots – all those folks living in ghettos, tenement slums, on the streets, Appalachian villages, and homeless camps in Florida – look at this “y’all come” generosity? Folks who’ve missed out somehow on the big win, what’s their take on this? If they were allowed to share their perspective, they could tell money-seekers a thing or two.

To Whom It May Concern:
Canada is a tough place to survive; you have to work hard to make a living; we’re almost all relatively poor; precipitation is unpredictable; our winters can be bitterly cold. We’re glad for immigrants but not delusions. 🙂

Morning Musing on Religion

Every morning when I turn on my browser, I’m offered a selection of interesting articles from various sources, “Recommended by Pocket.” Yesterday a headline in one of these boxes caught my eye, and I see it again this morning. (Click here to read it.)

Why Religion Is Not Going Away and Science Will Not Destroy It

A very interesting question indeed! It’s bound to stir up some thoughts in most readers. Here are my thoughts, for what they are worth.

Seeing this headline, my first thought was on the spiritual side. Our Creator, heavenly Father, the One we call God, the Eternal One. Science can’t make him disappear. So my answer is:
“As long as our Creator keeps reaching out to us, his creation, and touching our lives – often in miraculous ways – there will still be believers. Those of us who have heard his voice, felt his touch – yes, some have even seen him – can never deny the reality of his presence.” I’ve heard thousands of examples!

This morning when the question popped up again, I looked at the world RELIGION and thought:
“Religion won’t ever go away because religion divides people, and people like to be divided.”

Specifically, people like to be divided by “I’m on the RIGHT side and you’re on the WRONG side.”

Read history. Any factor that can divide people into two groups has been very popular. And religion is so very versatile. Add doctrines, interpretations, attitudes…”And of course God thinks like I do!” Voilà, you have a whole new group that’s righter than all the others. The Southern Believers versus the Central Believers versus the Eastern Believers versus the Western Believers. This sect versus that sect, etc.

Color, gender, family, money, style, ethnicity, nationality, politics, religion. Just introduce any of these factors and you’re apt to get some division. This is the downside of our human nature: feeling that people who don’t think like we do are wrong. Then throw in the media. Propaganda. “We are RIGHT and they are WRONG. We are the faithful; they are the infidels. We’re the ones who want law & order; they are the rebels.” Give both sides guns and they’ll likely start shooting each other.

People won’t soon give up their Rightness for impersonal science.

Our Creator has not designed us to be at each other’s throats; these attitudes don’t please him. When we come to him, and focus on him, we can lose these divisions with their respective animosities. As the Bible states:

“For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. – Galatians 3:27-28

“Lie not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the old man with his deeds; and have put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of him that created him: Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all.
Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering; forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye. And above all these things put on charity, which is the bond of perfectness.

– Colossians 3: 9 – 14

John Lennon wrote in his famous song, “Imagine there are no countries, no religion, no possessions…” (One might add, no drugs — another thing people fight over.)

Sounds so idealistic in a song, but would you really want to live in a world like that? And where would we put our human nature, that “being” within us that wants our own space, our own place, our own roots, our own understanding? If it all were wiped out tomorrow, give us a month and we’d have a whole new set of separations.

Removing the spiritual side of us would take out of this world the only thing that can moderate human nature. The only voice that does speak for compassion and peace. Most religions, not matter how off-course or fanatic their followers may get, do hold up kindness and respect as an ideal in relating to fellow human beings. Religion – focusing together in a sincere worship of our Father-Creator – has the best chance of uniting us.

The original article, published in September 2017 on Aeon, was written by Peter Harrison, an Australian Laureate Fellow and director of the Institute for Advanced Studies in the Humanities at the University of Queensland.

I didn’t read the article in great detail, but he starts with intellectuals once believing that science would eventually displace religion. However, this hasn’t proved true; religion is alive and well today. (I might throw in the fact here that in recent years a lot of scientists have admitted to some sort of “intelligent design” behind our world.)

He ends his article with an interesting conclusion: If science opposes religion, science will be the loser. So, advocates of science should quit making an “it’s him or me” enemy of religion.

Agreed! The One who created the world with all its marvelous synchronized workings should never be pitted against his creation as “one or the other.” They are in harmony.

Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings, and not one of them is forgotten before God? But even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not therefore: ye are of more value than many sparrows.

Luke 12: 6-7

The Path of a Storm

Fandango’s One-Word Challenge today is OMINOUS

Which brings me to a sobering question:
Who Can Direct the Path of a Storm?

On June 30, 1912 the city of Regina, Saskatchewan, was swathed in a sultry heat, over 100̊F by mid-afternoon. People sweated; some women at a public meeting were fainting; flags posted specially for Dominion Day celebrations the next day hung limp. At 4:30 pm folks outdoors noted a strange phenomenon: two cloud systems, accompanied by ominous rumblings, were headed their way. One was coming in from the southeast and the other from the southwest. The sky turned and eerie green; weird purplish flashes of lightening streaked across the land.

These cloud banks met right over the Legislative Building in the center of the city. There was a terrific boom as they collided and a huge grey funnel dropped from the boiling mass. Screaming and zigzagging, the twister cut a six-block wide swath northward through the heart of Regina, mowing down entire blocks of prosperous homes and rows of businesses, sucking up trees. It hit the rail-yards, bounced loaded freight cars across the tracks like tumbleweeds and later picked up the Winnipeg Grain Company elevators at the edge of town and tossed them across the prairie like they were sticks.

The citizens of Regina hadn’t seen a tornado before, had no idea what was about to hit them when the sky turned a lurid green. And no one could have predicted the tornado’s erratic path of destruction.

Who can direct the path of a storm in the affairs of men?

Reading history, I see where storm systems have arisen in human affairs. Two or more groups or movements, unhappy about the status quo and determined to upset it, move toward each other. Though they are naturally not aligned in purpose, they come together to accomplish a common goal, with each side thinking they can direct the changes that are going to be made. But there are secret agendas and other voices that factor in. These unforeseen radicals can change the course of the whole scheme – to the dismay of the initial participants.

Shakespeare, in his play Julius Caesar, gives a great example of this. Brutus and his fellow conspirators see Caesar as a ruthless tyrant and believe that doing away with him will solve their problems. Brutus, persuading his fellow senators to join in the scheme, utters the famous line, “There is a tide in the affairs of men which, taken at the flow, leads on to fortune…”

So they go ahead with their dastardly deed. At Caesar’s funeral Brutus gives Mark Anthony a chance to speak, not seeing him as a threat. Caesar was the problem; with him gone, things will go as planned. And Mark Anthony starts his discourse on a compliant note:
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears! I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him.” He says that Brutus has given him leave to speak, “For Brutus is an honorable man; So are they all, all honorable men…”

Then, through crafty use of eulogy and rhetoric, he manages to paint Caesar as, after all, a benevolent ruler. By the time he’s done, he’s completely turned the crowd against the murderers. The senators, who had pictured themselves floating down that tide toward fortune, rather end up being tossed into a turbulent and bloody sea.

Rhetoric is a marvelous thing. It can persuade, get people fired up for a cause. It can also turn plans upside down. In the long run it’s iffy. Fine speeches rarely take into account all the angles, and before you know it, one pops up that no one considered.

Many a participant in some past movement, in retrospect, has wished they’d not been so swayed by the noble rhetoric and taken an honest look at all the facets of the movement. Who all was involved and what the real objectives were. They wish they’d had a better idea of where the movement was actually heading before lending their support — because where the movement finally ended up is far, far from where they expected to be.

In my next post I’ll write about the two women’s movements that came together in the late 1800s, both unhappy with the status quo, both with definite goals, and the path that the resulting tornado actually took.

This Constant Call to Judge

My Thoughts on Facts, as Presented by Pro-s and Anti-s

Another attempted coup against the government of Prinstonia has been thwarted. Inside sources report that a group of anarchists calling itself the Citizens’ Coalition launched an attack yesterday but the National Army were successful in routing the rebels and restoring order to the country. Prime Minister Jerimeau, appearing in a news conference this morning, lauded the swift action of the National Army to avert anarchy.

Another attempt was made yesterday by the Citizens’ Coalition to oust the dictatorship now governing the country of Prinstonia. Inside sources report that the National Army, in a bloody battle for control, ruthlessly crushed the attempted coup by Coalition soldiers. Prime Minister Jerimeau, the tyrant who has been holding the country in an iron grip for the past five years, appeared in a news conference this morning, obviously gloating over the victory.

You be the Judge. Which report are you going to believe?

Every day readers around the world are bombarded with news, actual happenings infused with carefully crafted opinions. Daily the media invites us to pass judgment on situations we know little or nothing about. Journalists and editors offer their opinion on what’s going on and how sensible people should feel about it. Thus they bring public pressure to bear on — and usually against — any government or decision. However, the pressure generated is based almost wholly on what’s been written by said journalists and editors. Forty years ago my husband commented that the Press considers itself the official opposition, and in the time since, I’ve seen that to be true.

In the account above, Prime Minister Jerimeau may be a tyrant – or he may be a half-decent sort who truly has the welfare of his country at heart. He may be ruthlessly clutching at power – or he may be trying hard to hold together the various rebellious factions in a quavery sort of peace. He may be lining his pockets – but that in itself doesn’t mean he’s out to crush his people. A stable country where the citizens can go about their business without fear is always going to be better off, even if the big cheeses have mansions and the PM has his own private jet, than one in constant civil war.

Are We Living in an Anti- Age?

Doesn’t it seem these days that if anyone squawks about being oppressed by their rulers, people are more inclined to be sympathetic than skeptical? I get the impression at times that news articles are more apt to support anti-government, anti-status quo groups than voices from the pro-side of things. In any country, at any time, there will always be the dissatisfied “if we were in charge we’d do things right,” types – and the media seems only too happy to find them and air their vitriol. But they’re feeding us the news we want. “Looming civil war” sells. “Everyone’s content” is so hohum.

I wonder how much our inclinations have been shaped by the anti-establishment, anti-status quo, anti-materialistic thinking of the ’60s? We know there must be law and order – we and our own cushy lifestyle would not survive long in a war zone. But do we still have a bit of that 60s sentiment running through our veins that inclines us to favor rebels? And is the media giving us regular infusions of the same?

Examples in history show that rebels who kidnap and murder to destabilize the current government are very apt to continue the practice once they do get into power. Also, though they are certain they could do so much better at running things, rebels seldom have a clear plan for the future — except to wipe out all the last guys.

A Few Historical Examples

No Proposed Plan:
Prior to the US Civil War the Anti-Slavery league had noble goals and great rhetoric. The cause was just; things needed to change. Feeling of compassion were fanned and many Northerners were truly concerned about the suffering victims. More philosophical sorts considered slavery a blot on the country; it must be wiped out. However, it seems no one had a “where to from here” plan, either for restoring the shattered American union or bettering the lot of the now homeless, jobless, landless, illiterate, former slaves. They were mostly left to shift for themselves as best they could in a very hostile environment.

An Idealistic But Untried Plan:
During World War I the Russian government was in a disastrous downward spiral and the peasants were starving. Along came Vladimir Lenin, anti-monarchist, anti-bourgeoisie, enthused about Karl Marx’s brilliant plan for a utopian society based on share and share alike. However, when put into practice, communism just created a new bunch of tyrants and an oppressive, ineffective government.

The “We’ll Get It Right” Plan:
Prohibition had actually been tried in the state of Georgia in the late 1700s. The law was rescinded after seven years seeing as folks kept right on drinking; farmers found operating a still more profitable than farming; juries were lenient toward offenders; rum-runners from nearby states were making mint. Had the Temperance leaders circa 1900 studied this and taken to heart the results, they could have saved North America a LOT of woe. Or maybe they did know, but decided, “We’ll do it better and it will work this time.”

Yes, the big pushes behind the anti-drinking movement, the churches and the Womens’ Christian Temperance Movement, were very optimistic about their ability to reform human nature. And they were actually doing a good work of promoting temperance — until they took it into the political arena. They meant well and thought legally turning off the tap would finally stop the thirst for liquor. They never dreamed that Prohibition would so foster organized crime.

Sadly, Christians are still far too inclined to push plans they feel will benefit mankind and refuse to accept what the Bible says about non-Christian thinking, that it is “not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” Coming from an non-Christian background myself, I can testify that making Christian moral rules for people who are not Christian is a kind of self-delusion. You kid yourself that “In our country we don’t allow…” while the average Joe just finds ways around the rules.

A Current Example of Compassion But No Plan
In the past few years I’ve seen many stories about the plight of children caught at the US-Mexican border. Accounts of “children being ripped from their parents’ arms” – though some workers in that area do question whose children these really are – and now being held in detention centers in Texas. I’m seeing a lot of criticism and condemnation of the US govt and the President, but no practical fix-it for this sad situation. Should they just turn all those children loose to fend for themselves? Hall them all across the border and dump them? Allow all those illegal aliens to reclaim their children and make them US citizens, thus sending the signal for more to come?

I have many questions about all this. Why did these people suddenly start coming? Who led them to believe they could now successfully sneak into the US?
Somebody has created this unique situation; what was their motive? Was this sudden influx somehow a cleverly engineered plan to force, or embarrass, the US administration?
What if all the concerned, critical Americans would rather offer to take in, and be responsible for, these children? Like foster care? Would that help?
This would show genuine compassion rather than simple anti-Trump vitriol. But there are so many children in the US foster care system now that need homes, too. Alas, it’s all beyond me!

Being Overfed Isn’t Healthy

In our day we have so many conflicting voices, so many people pointing us this way and that. This pressure adds a lot of stress to our lives as we’re almost forced to decide on issues we know so little about. We’re being “fed” – and sometimes the fare is toxic, giving us heartburn and high blood pressure. But just because the media wants to feed us doesn’t mean we have to swallow everything they’re offering us. We can resist emotional pleas that overlook so many factors. Generally, it’s best to reserve judgment until we’ve done some serious digging to find the facts.

Sometimes we have to hit the OFF button. Knowing my own limitations, I can’t have the weight of the world’s woes pressing on my mind and be an emotionally healthy person.

Planet Earth: Future Haze

As I sat down to write more about the subject of pre-millennialism, I asked my husband how he remembers this and that. So he’s handed me several books on the subject of prophecy. About a weeks’ worth of reading. 🙂 Prophecy is so complex and so much could be written, but I’d really like to keep this simple for those of you who are interested in reading it.
Let’s start in the dim distant past….

The Dormant Pre-millennial Doctrine Starts to Grow

According to Dave MacPherson in his book, The Incredible Cover-Up – © 1975 by Logos International – there was some pre-millennial thinking in the US colonies before 1830. It did rise somewhat during the mid-1800s with currents blowing in from a mini charismatic revival in Scotland and England, together with J N Darby’s teachings. It really began to take hold during the Civil War and by the 1870s folks were starting to say this was the only biblical understanding of the end times.

John Nelson Darby has had a huge impact on evangelical thinking in various ways. Born in 1800, Darby became a priest in the church of England in 1826, but after a time was burdened about the dissatisfaction he felt in his own Christian life. He had an experience where he came to understand that salvation can never be earned; it comes only through faith in Jesus Christ. Feeling like he’d been cleansed and set free, he began an attack on the Church of England for not guiding him aright.

According to Frank’s book, Christians of that era – especially in the US – were upbeat, seeing the Christian church as an army “marching forth triumphantly to spread the gospel and inaugurate the millenium.” As in the song, “Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of the Lord.” Evangelicals were right ready to trample those grapes of wrath: slavery, booze, and whatever other sins they saw as drawbacks to the coming kingdom.

Jesus said, “…upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. Matt 16:18

Darby disagreed. “The church is in ruins,” he said. The established church was broken beyond repair and believers who wanted to carry on the true Christian faith should abandon churches and assemble as small groups of believers without a formal organization or title. Calling themselves “Christians gathered in the name of the Lord,” the group has become known as the Plymouth Brethren.

The Church As the Spiritual Successor to Israel

This was a commonly accepted belief prior to Darby’s time. Pre-, Post- and A-millennialists were agreed: Israel ceased to be God’s people when they rejected Christ and the Church became the spiritual successor of Israel. Theologians and preachers taught that all believers are now the people of God, both Jews and gentiles. As the Apostle Paul writes:

“Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free: but Christ is all, and in all. Put on therefore, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies, kindness, humbleness of mind, meekness, longsuffering; Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye. And above all these things put on charity, which is the bond of perfectness.” Colossians 3: 11-14

Darby nixed this belief, too. Rather, he claimed that the Christian church is God’s heavenly kingdom and Israel is still God’s earthly people. Even though the Jews were unfaithful in keeping the laws of Moses, Darby said, God will still follow through with his promise to make Israel a great nation. Someday. We just need to understand the time frame for this.

“The Only Credible Explanation of Scripture”

Analyzing and “rightly dividing” he came up with the doctrine of dispensationalism. This doctrine divides history into six different eras, or dispensations. The Bible, to scholars who embraced his ideas, became like a jigsaw puzzle with various verses neatly divided and reconstructed into “easy-to-understand” eras. My grasp is hazy; a real Bible scholar who follows Darby’s thinking wold have this down pat.

The time of Adam & Eve and their descendants is one; the time of Noah and his ark is another; The Israelites of Abraham, Isaac & Jacob’s time is another. When Israel settled in the Promised Land and became a country is another. I think Jesus time on earth is part of that era, but then we have the Gospel era – the time since Christ – which, according to these teachers, is an interruption of God’s plan. The future “Thousand Year Reign of Christ on earth” is counted as another. I may not have these all as they are taught today, but you get the general idea.

Here in North America a theologian, minister, and writer named Cyrus I Scofield caught the vision of dispensationalism. He felt it was the only credible explanation for many Bible passages and set about to publish it. His annotated Scofield Reference Bible, with its explanations and cross references, became a best-seller and dispensationalism was widely accepted by evangelicals in North America.

The Rapture: Secret or Open?

Will cars crash, planes fall from the sky, teachers, workers, students disappear in a poof? According to the “secret rapture” thinking, Yes. According to other interpretations of prophecy, No. When Jesus returns to this earth, everyone will know it.

The a-millennial view has been that when Jesus returns in the clouds, the archangel will sound the trumpet and all Jesus children will be gathered up to glory with him. The Rapture will be a one-time thing, open for all to see. At that time the earth and the sea will give up their dead and those responsible for crucifying him “Will look upon him whom they have pierced.” Those who have rejected him will be so dismayed and afraid, they will, “will cry to the rocks and the hill to cover them” from his face.

As to the “time of great tribulation” foretold by Jesus, that mainly took place at the destruction of Jerusalem. The Christians of that day did forsake the city, as Jesus warned them to, when they saw the Roman army gathering around it. (To some extent this tribulation has been going on since, as Christians have been persecuted and many still are.)

The post-millennial idea is much the same. When Jesus comes back “every eye shall see him.” They understand from various scriptures that he will return to earth at the end of a period of great tribulation (which is going on now) and set up his kingdom, but they say it’s the church herself that will usher in this millennium of peace. As I said in an early post, that theory has about disappeared.

The Pre-Millennial Theory: Four Different Camps

According to Dave MacPherson, there are four positions re: the millennium to come:
— those who espouse the “pretrib” theory say there will be a secret Rapture where all Christians drawn up from the earth to meet Jesus before the time of tribulation comes, so that no Christians need to suffer through the natural disasters and war that will befall this earth.
— those who think “mid-trib” see the Rapture coming somewhere in the middle of these seven years of tribulation.
— Those who espouse the “post-trib” theory sees the Rapture as coming at the end of the seven years of tribulation
— partial rapturists who believe there will be more than one Rapture, which may occur at several points before/during/after the time of tribulation.

“Pre-trib rapture” was unheard of before Darby visited a fifteen-year old Scottish girl who, in 1830, had a vision about Jesus’ return. From her vision of a select group of Christians being carried away secretly, Darby built his “pretrib” teaching. According to Douglas Frank, Darby came to North American seven times between 1862 and 1877 to share his doctrinal system with evangelicals and it caught on. Christians were glad to hear that they’d be removed before the coming woes.

Back home in England, any of his fellow Plymouth Brethren who didn’t agree with him over these doctrines were threatened with excommunication and eternal punishment. For all that, over the years the Plymouth Brethren have had various schisms resulting in PB 2, PB 3, PB 4, etc. We once met a couple from Plymouth Brethren Four, and that was a very strict group. For one thing, services every evening — and you’d better be there!

Dave MacPherson, a preacher’s kid and preacher’s grandkid, grew up hearing prophecy discussed. However, he found that Bible teachers weren’t very open to viewpoints other than their own:
“In my Bible institute days I learned the hard way that there are sharply disagreeing schools of prophetic interpretation. I would discuss prophecy at various times with other students and bring up viewpoints differing in detail from the school’s official position.
This finally resulted in my dismissal.”

Did Jesus Fail to Establish the Kingdom God Intended?

Some of this premillennial thinking is built on the idea that Jesus planned to set up the kingdom, but when he was rejected, that plan was scrapped.

“For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given…” applied to Jesus first visit to Earth.
But… “He came unto his own, and his own received him not…”

So, according to pre-millennial thinking, when the Jewish nation rejected Jesus and had him done away with, he went back up to heaven and Plan B kicked in. Or was Plan B always the real plan because God knew Jesus would be rejected? Depends on the Bible scholar that’s teaching this.

Plan B – which again varies according to who’s explaining it – is that Jesus will return twice – or maybe three times before his work on earth is finished. He’ll come for his church (secretly or not, once or twice.) Seven years of severe tribulation will befall the earth. Then he will come again openly, bringing all the saints with him, and set up his headquarters in Jerusalem. He and his saints will rule over all the earth. Israel will be a great nation again. All the people of earth will obey him.

In 1919 J.C. Masee wrote:
“I am not looking for an immediate residence in Heaven. I expect to be there only a little time and then I am coming back with him to live in a redeemed earth, and rule here with him in the earth. I would regret to believe that I would have to spend my thousand years in heaven. The reward of the saints is to have the privilege of coming back with Jesus to reign here over the nations with him.
(Philadelphia School of the Bible)

At the end of the thousand-year reign (the Millenium), there will be a major satanic-led rebellion and Jesus will totally crush this. Then will come the great Judgment Day. This present earth and heaven will pass away; in a new heaven and earth Jesus will take his rightful throne and “the government will be on his shoulders and his kingdom will be an everlasting one.”

For Lo! The Kingdom of God is Within You.

As you can guess, I don’t accept the pre-millennial thinking of our day, nor do I put a lot of faith in prophetic speculation as a whole. I’m far more concerned with TODAY. What will come, will come. I believe many Christians feel somewhat the same: it’s interesting to speculate, but so many verses can be understood in different ways, literal or figurative. The most important thing is, “What do I need to know to live my Christian life today?

And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them. – Ezekiel 36: 27