Demystifying Darby

Earlier this year,  Crawford Gribben published his new book J.N. Darby and the Roots of Dispensationalism. I had pre-ordered a copy, so I was reading mine as soon as it could be delivered to the homestead. I wanted to talk about the book, but I have found it difficult to articulate what I want to say. So over the couple weeks, I found myself reading it for a second time: highlighter, pencil and sticky notes at hand. I think I might be ready to talk about it now.

 

Everyone should read Darby. I don't mean everyone should read everything Darby wrote – I haven't done that myself.  I mean reading Darby was a life-changing experience for me, and I would like to see everyone have that same experience. If every Christian would read Collected Writings, Volume 12, we'd be in much better shape. 

 

Everyone who reads Darby should read J.N. Darby and the Roots of Dispensationalism. This is the book I have needed to read for some time now. I hesitate to reuse the term "life-changing," but I think it might just be correct.

One might ask why I'd consider a book like this to be life-changing. I asked myself that question many times. It took me a while to understand that putting Darby into historical doctrinal context had the effect of demystifying "J. N. D."

Like it or not (and I think he would not like it), J. N. Darby has become a larger-than-life figure. A myth has built up around him. Spend enough time in or around "brethren" groups, and you'll hear someone talk about "truths recovered in the 19th Century" or "truths recovered by J. N. Darby."  While the people making these statements mean well, they have the effect of creating a mythic figure. It's only a short step for that figure to become an idol.

The problem with Darby in particular is that he's a good idol. I don't mean he's good at being an idol, but that he was genuinely used by God. William R. Newell wrote:

We know what debt under God all those who have the truth today owe to Darby, through whom God recovered more truth belonging to the Church of God, than through any other man since Paul, and whose writings are today the greatest treasure of truth and safeguard against error known to instructed believers. (Romans, Verse-by-verse,  p. 464)

Newell was not in fellowship among "brethren," which makes his statement much more powerful. This isn't simple sectarianism. But there is a real danger of hero worship here.

What Gribben's book does – like nothing else I have read on Darby quite does – is put Darby into context. It shows that he stood in the tradition of early 19th Century high church Calvinism (see pp. 35ff). It shows that he stood on the shoulders of giants like John Owen. It shows that he didn't spring up out of nowhere like John the Baptist, but was a product of his time.

At the same time, it shows that he wasn't merely parroting some party line. He really did make strides in understanding Scripture. He really did all that tough work and scholarship. He really did recover some truths that were largely ignored until then. His books really are worth reading.

Reading this book was a Nehushtan moment for me. It led me to a place where I could see and appreciate Darby's strengths, gifts, and work; while at the same time allowing me to see him as a man. A godly man, but a man for all that. 

J.N. Darby and the Roots of Dispensationalism is a dense book. It's 256 pages (including the Preface), but the Conclusion ends at page 154, meaning more than a third of the book is in notes, index, and bibliography. The 140 (-ish) pages of the book proper are packed. I felt like I had read a book at least three times as long.

The book is broken into four main chapters: "Soteriology", "Ecclesiology", "Pneumatology", and "Eschatology."  They examine Darby's views on each topic in turn, placing them in context both within contemporaneous "brethren" writings and the wider 19th Century Protestantism. Darby's views are shown to have been "Calvinistic, catholic, charismatic, and catastrophic" (pp. 32–33).

That summary aligns very closely with what I had observed reading Darby. Where the book added value for me was in tracing Darby's views back before his time. If you'll forgive a lengthy quote from the Conclusion:

[Croskery] might have discovered in the works of Johannes Piscator Darby's argument that believers were not justified through the imputation of the righteousness of Christ; he might have learned from John Owen Darby's argument that believers should meet for Bible study without clerical oversight and for the weekly celebration of the Lord's Supper; he might have found in the works of Johannes Cocceius the idea that redemptive history progressed through a sequence of ages, as a consequence of which believers were not bound to keep the Lord's Day as the Christian Sabbath; and he might have located the idea that Jewish people would be converted to Christianity and restored to the Promised Land in the Geneva Bible and many English puritans. (pp. 146–147)

In other words, Darby was in good company when it came to his more radical views. That also means he didn't spring out of nowhere as a larger-than-life figure, some modern John the Baptist. And this is the point I needed to see clearly.

I've said before that whenever I think Darby was wrong on a particular point, it's only a matter of time until I come around to his point of view. There are very few questions on which I think Darby was actually wrong. I might not see completely eye-to-eye with him on sealing, but I think he's generally correct. I'm reluctant to describe myself as paedo-baptist, but I think that's not too far off the truth. So while my views might differ from his in minutiae, I have come around to his way of thinking on almost every question.

The one area where I have real trouble is in his conception of Christian fellowship at the present time. The fact is that we have seen his ecclesiastical ideas work themselves out over the last 150+ years, and they have been disastrous. By "disastrous" I don't mean, "they just don't work." I mean, "they have led into positive sin." My experience among "brethren" has led me to the view that whatever they meant to accomplish by "leaving the systems," what they really did was just set up their own system that is an almost perfect imitation of the systems they claim to have left. Every sin I have heard "brethren" attribute to Christians "in system," I have seen them practice themselves.

Since 2007, I have been asking the question, "how can I live out the truth brethren hold, without falling into the same snares they have fallen into?"  Over time, I've come to some conclusions on that topic that would shock and horrify some. I've shared some of those conclusions here; I've kept others to myself.

To put it another way, the struggle for me has been to know how to tell when walking with the Lord means walking in Darby's footprints, and when walking with the Lord means avoiding pitfalls that Darby fell into. I have spent the majority of my life in gatherings where even suggesting Darby fell into pitfalls would be seen as  dangerous.

It has been helpful to me to read a book that acknowledges Darby's contributions, innovations, and godliness, while at the same time acknowledging where he was one more in a long line of believers who saw the same things in Scripture.

So I still think everyone should read at least some Darby. But I think it might be helpful to read Gribben's new book first. And at the risk of sounding like I'm self-promoting, I posted an "essential Darby reading list" on this blog. In case anyone wants help getting started.