Yeah again, this is not my field. But I do have a question for you. Can you tell me more about this Darby and Dispensationalism? What did Darby come up with?
The history is as follows. The earliest Christian eschatology was, I believe, Premillennial. That is, the followers of the Apostle John in Asia Minor and elsewhere believed the Apostle John had written of a literal thousand years to follow the Return of Christ. The Apostles apparently believed Christ would return to save Israel, but over time this belief was lost in the Church.
Due to the failure of Israel to get saved as a nation, Christians stopped believing in a future Millennial Kingdom in which Israel would be restored to God. This "Replacement Theology" began in Premillennialism, but ended in Amillennialism, because the literal promises of God, having failed, were reinterpreted in a symbolic way. A literal Millennium was now a "symbolic Millennium," representing the current Church Age. And the International Church was now "Israel."
Leaders like Origen and Augustine led in this symbolic interpretation, and Augustine's great influence led the Church into a long age of Amillennial eschatology. The Church was the new "Kingdom of God," and the new "Israel." The Jews were lost, being carnal representations of what God intended to become a spiritual people. Most biblical prophecies were viewed as either previously fulfilled or being realized in the present.
However, just as Israel had fallen into idolatry and corruption, the Church in the Middle Ages began to fall into similar corruption. This brought forward the Reformation, whose leadership began to view the Papacy as the Antichrist.
To fight this association of the Papacy with the Antichrist, two Catholics, Ribera and Lacunza, began to push for a more "futurist" view of biblical prophecy, viewing the Antichrist as not the Papacy but something more akin to how Dan 7 described it, and as Rev 13 described it, as a Beast with 10 horns and 7 heads. And Lacunza began to promote a future Millennium as well.
Belief in Premillennialism is associated with belief that Israel will be restored as a nation to God. So historic Amillennialism began to be questioned with these two Catholic priests.
In Great Britain, Irving picked up on Lacunza's work to promote Premillennial Futurism. And Darby borrowed this information to formulate Dispensationalism, which is Premillennial Futurism with a twist of Pretribulationism. From this point out, Premillennialism, together with belief in a future restoration of Israel, competed successfully with the historic Amillennial position, which seems to be a restoration of the original eschatology of the Church.
Pretribulationism is the belief that Christ's Coming can take place at any time to remove the Church from the earth. This will be a 1st secret Coming of Christ, just prior to a 7 year reign of Antichrist, which is called "the Great Tribulation." It is supposed that this "70th Week of Daniel," which is interpreted from Dan 9 in a "Futurist" way, is a time when Israel embraces the Antichrist, but eventually turns to Christ at his Coming.
This "Tribulation Period" is supposedly a combination of Antichrist's cruel abuse of remaining Christians and divine punishments upon the earth. This is what helps to turn Israel back to God. Then Christ comes a 2nd time to defeat the Antichrist, save Israel, and establish a thousand year reign of God's Kingdom.
I am a Futurist personally, believing in a literal future coming of the Antichrist. A corrupt Pope may be his partner--don't know.
I'm also a believer in the salvation of Israel at Christ's 2nd Coming, which will be at the end of the age. I do not believe in a Pretribulation Rapture of the Church, and feel that the Bible teaches only a 3.5 year reign of Antichrist. Nor do I hold to a "Futurist" view of the 70th Week of Dan 9.
The Reign of Antichrist will not be the final wrath God pours down upon Antichrist, but only preliminary indications of the same, which will be poured out primarily on the last day, in the Battle of Armageddon.
This will be a lot for you to take in, since this isn't your thing. But you asked for a quick summary, and this is it.