Talk:Margaret Macdonald (Prophecy)
By the article's original author
[edit]Please do not go into detail in this article on the descriptions of the various views of the Rapture, etc. The purpose of this article is to present the text of Macdonald's vision, not to debate or expound on the rapture or Christian theology. There are other articles that go into detail on those topics.
I deliberately kept the descriptions extremely simple. They are written specifically for people who know nothing about Christian theology or prophecy. Too many times, prophecy zealots forget that most people don't understand their jargon. For instance, I had to revert changes someone made to the definition of Amillennialism that made it totally incomprehensible to people not familiar with the topic.
No doubt the changes made to the Amillennialism description which you reverted were actually accurate. Please make appropriate changes. Mike 05:57, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
bias
[edit]The above article is extremely biased to one point of view, without citations to explain dramatic conclusions and left me without any better understanding on this person or this subject.
There exists a real debate on Margaret Mcdonald and her role in the "Rapture" that this article fails to address. In an attempt to dismiss the debate, the explaination is muddled and offers no help. Editing her statements to shade them to your conclusions is a poor method of debate.
I don't offer a conclusion to the debate because I don't have one yet. If you do have an answer, you need citations to prove your point.
Misinformation
[edit]The Author's description of Amillennialism is badly flawed. The view he describes would be classified as "Postmillennialism". Amillennarians do not teach that the world will "keep getting better and better", but rather that good and evil will advance in equal measure until the end of the Millennium, at which time Satan will be unbound and a great apostasy will follow. When all these events have come to pass, Christ will then return and carry out a general resurrection and a general judgment.
Not that I'm convinced that any of this belongs in a Margaret Macdonald article anyway. Mike 05:51, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
And more bias is added
[edit]If Darby took the concept of the Rapture from Margaret Maqcdonald, it's doubtful he would have admitted it to his followers in his letters. Her views predate his and the two had contact before he spoke to others of this idea. That ambiguity is why this article lacks neutrality.
The extreme conclusion you force on the reader has no evidence to back it up. Nothing is resolved here about their relationship. Either present this neutrally and delete the false conclusions or avoid this issue because there are honest questions from both sides on this matter. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.244.113.9 (talk) 22:34, 17 June 2008 (UTC)