John Nelson Darby was a British-Irish blooded, Dublin-trained, lawyer who turned Church of Ireland minister and then moved on (1828) to help establish the Plymouth Brethren. He would perhaps be unknown today but for his meeting with eighteen-year-old Margaret MacDonald who is said to have had a vision regarding a “secret rapture” of the church. Though this doctrine has other, older, questionable roots, Darby popularized it in the Isles and in America having a strong influence on C. I. Scofield. Scofield in turn, placed the secret rapture idea in his Scofield Bible and today it has widely held acceptance among many evangelicals though the word rapture is non-biblical. Many also have failed to atempt to reconcile their concept of “thief in the night” with the rest of Peter’s inspired words, “But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up” 2Pe 3.10. Three items are here which surely seem to not be secret.
Jesus is going to come! That is in the Bible. The return of Christ is not in question!
Too many are accepting the doctrine of a “secret rapture” without examining it. Look up it origins (the “s” is purposeful) – it will surprise you. The secret rapture appears to have catholic roots. It has also this visionary root in MacDonald.
Conversely does a “secret rapture” have any roots in the actual Bible? Do your homework. Be willing to re-examine this doctrine. Or for many – be willing to examine it for the first time. Can (will) this doctrine play into the hands of the antichrist?
One source to see is Grace, Faith, and Holiness, (Kansas City: Beacon Hill Press, 1988), 586.
Separate-Holy 
Great points!
I have become convinced through Bible Study (not through the study of popular End Times books) that the popular view of a Pre-Trib secret rapture is completely un-Biblical. (A literal reading of 1 Thes 4:13-18 and 2 Thes. 2:1-4 is just one reason and Rev. 20:4-6 is another of many reasons.)
Notice also the order of Daniel 7:11-13. We have the beasts (political rulers) ruling after the beast is slain and then after that we have Jesus coming with “the clouds” of heaven.
Another point regarding the coming as a “thief in the night” is that after the sixth angel’s vial (Revelation 16:12) the “thief in the night” coming still will not have happened yet (16:15) at least not until just before the seventh angel’s vial is to be poured out in Rev. 16:17.
Another point of what I think is a common error is the Marriage Supper of the Lamb…often thought to be during seven years directly after a secret rapture and during the a time called seven years of the anti-Christ on the earth. But according to its Revelation context (19:7) the marriage supper of the Lamb is directly after the destruction of Babylon and/or(?) the whore (Rev. 18:2-19:4) with God’s wrath and fire.
As you mentioned I also have found Scriptural evidence after evidence that the coming of our Lord is not going to be secret.
As to your final question. If the church would teach that the Anti-Christ will not come until after the Rapture, once the anti-Christ is here doing his deceits the church will think that he can’t be the anti-Christ because the Rapture hadn’t happened yet. The anti-Christ may very well have the backing of the church thinking that He has moral grounds to do all he is doing (sort of like . . . dare I say it . . . like the Religious Right / Christian backed wars that we have going on today). I think that this is in part where 2 Thes. 2:11-12 could come in.
There is so much more that I’d like to say; I wish that I could sit down with you and discuss the “so much more.”
Interesting post this is that you have posted.
Thank you,
Phillip