Jump to content
  • Welcome Guest

    For an ad free experience on Online Baptist, Please login or register for free

Mark 9:1


Recommended Posts

  • Members

Outside of Scripture, is there a "trail" of those who held to these views from early on or where do we first hear of them.

Are there links where these are explained well?

The problem I've had in trying to look into various views on this topic is the tendency of many to try and over do it with so much being piled on it's not clear what they are getting at...or, there is so much "they say, we say" stuff that it gets mixed up. Add to this that those who say they hold to a certain view don't seem to agree with some others who say they hold to that view. And, of course, with so many different views it can be difficult to keep them all straight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 107
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Members

This link looks useful.

Perhaps the earliest ECF, Clement, is reported to be "Clement of Rome [A.D. 30-100] - Amillennial Preterist."


I just finished reading some of this and will read some more later.

Feel free to post other links as well. I try to keep an open mind in this area because I find it humbling that when Jesus was present in Israel He wasn't recognized for how He truly was, mostly because those who should have known (the religious leaders), as well as others, had failed to rightly divide the Word of Truth and had misinterpreted the prophecy of the coming Messiah.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

The Roman Catholic church founded their wealth on the belief that the millenium would end in AD 1000 and was the church age, as it was seen at the time. Many handed over their wealth to the (Roman) church, believing that the world was to end and they thought that would stand them in good stead. When the year 1000 was over they tried to get their property back, but they found that the bishops and priests had arranged it that it was all legal and there was n othing that could be done about it. It seems that the clergy took advantage of the popular belief while not believing it themselves, otherwise they would have distributed it to the poor instead of making themselves and the church rich. So the church became rich and the people became poor.

At the time of the reformation, Luther believed that the millenium was from the time of the Revelation till the coming of the Turk. AD 100 till AD 1100 in round figures.

Others at the time believed it to be from the birth of Christ till AD 1000, others varied between those two beliefs.

E B Elliott, an historic millenialist, writing in the early 1840s, gives a refutation of various forms of preterism and futurism. He doesn't mention dispensationslism as it almost did not exist at that time, arising in the west country during the previous 10 years with the Plymouth Brethren.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
The Roman Catholic church founded their wealth on the belief that the millenium would end in AD 1000 and was the church age, as it was seen at the time.


Pity that they did not read what the one they claim as the first pope wrote about the precision to be attached to the millennium. (2 Peter 3.)

I haven't got a reference, but I understand some of the puritans counted the post millennium from the overthrow of the papacy & looked forward to the progress of the Gospel.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
E B Elliott, an historic millenialist, writing in the early 1840s, gives a refutation of various forms of preterism and futurism.


Was he a historic A- or PRE-millennialist ?

I can refute some forms of preterism (& futurism & historic amillennialism) but our studies should lead us to a right understanding of preterism, NOT confusion.

Once most of the Apostles were dead, & the Olivet prophecy fulfilled, people went on looking for prophetic fulfillment, as the ECF writings show.

We need to keep to the Scriptures, NOT man's interpretation, in fact we have to beware of "interpretation" as there is a tendency to make the Scriptures say what they are not saying. There is also a tendency to consider OT prophecy as if it stood apart from the Apostolic writings that quote & interpret. Our interpretation must be guided by Jesus & the Apostles.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



Was he a historic A- or PRE-millennialist ?

I can refute some forms of preterism (& futurism & historic amillennialism) but our studies should lead us to a right understanding of preterism, NOT confusion.

Once most of the Apostles were dead, & the Olivet prophecy fulfilled, people went on looking for prophetic fulfillment, as the ECF writings show.

We need to keep to the Scriptures, NOT man's interpretation, in fact we have to beware of "interpretation" as there is a tendency to make the Scriptures say what they are not saying. There is also a tendency to consider OT prophecy as if it stood apart from the Apostolic writings that quote & interpret. Our interpretation must be guided by Jesus & the Apostles.


E B Elliott was a Historic Pre millenialist.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
E B Elliott, an historic millenialist, writing in the early 1840s, gives a refutation of various forms of preterism and futurism.


That statement is meaningless. You claim to reject preterism, but you hold to preterist understanding of the 70 weeks & Olivet prophecies.

You reject futurism, but you hold in effect to a futurist interpretation of Revelation by seeing it fulfilled in the centuries after it was written, & of course in a future millennium.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



That statement is meaningless. You claim to reject preterism, but you hold to preterist understanding of the 70 weeks & Olivet prophecies.

You reject futurism, but you hold in effect to a futurist interpretation of Revelation by seeing it fulfilled in the centuries after it was written, & of course in a future millennium.


No Sir.

I hold to the historicist interpretaion of the 70 weeks & Olivet prophecies. which just happens to be similar to the preterist at that point.

I hold to the historicist interpretation of Revelation, considering it to be a history of the Church age, written in advance. Preterism believes it was fulfilled in the past, futurism believes that is is all in the future. Both are Jesuit doctrines.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

What's this, a Historicist and a Preterist are arguing Revelation? :clapping:

"Hey sweetheart, can you bring me a soda and a bag of popcorn - this is ganna be good!" :th_laugh1:


That from someone who has written a book on Revelation, based on Jesuit doctrine.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members
What's this, a Historicist and a Preterist are arguing Revelation? :clapping:

"Hey sweetheart, can you bring me a soda and a bag of popcorn - this is ganna be good!"

At least historicism & preterism have Biblical substance, unlike the soda & popcorn of futurism.


I hold to the historicist interpretaion of the 70 weeks & Olivet prophecies. which just happens to be similar to the preterist at that point.

Not just similar - the same understanding of Scriptural fulfillment.

I hold to the historicist interpretation of Revelation, considering it to be a history of the Church age, written in advance. Preterism believes it was fulfilled in the past, futurism believes that is is all in the future. Both are Jesuit doctrines.

I haven't studied Jesuit teaching so I can't comment. I have studied the Bible - for nearly 60 years.

Regarding Revelation, you & the futurists rely on interpretation unguided by Scripture. Preterists rely on the understanding of Scripture, guided by Scripture itself.

e.g. We see the references to the destruction of the temple in 2 Thes. 2 & Rev. 11 as referring to the prophesied destruction of the temple.

We see his prophesied coming to judge those who rejected him as AD 70. Luk 20:16 He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall give the vineyard to others. And when they heard [it], they said, God forbid.

There are many references to clouds being the sign of God's presence in the OT, & many visitations. God has a real interest in his world & his people.

Exd 40:34 ¶ Then a cloud covered the tent of the congregation, and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle.

Jer 8:12 Were they ashamed when they had committed abomination? nay, they were not at all ashamed, neither could they blush: therefore shall they fall among them that fall: in the time of their visitation they shall be cast down, saith the LORD.

Luk 7:16 And there came a fear on all: and they glorified God, saying, That a great prophet is risen up among us; and, That God hath visited his people.

1Pe 2:12 Having your conversation honest among the Gentiles: that, whereas they speak against you as evildoers, they may by [your] good works, which they shall behold, glorify God in the day of visitation.

There is one final coming for resurrection & judgment. Rev. (including Rev. 20) MUST be understood in the context of Scripture, not given some fanciful treatment.

2Th 1:7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,
8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

I won't fall out with David for his historicism - I preached right through Rev. guided by Hendriksen before I understood from a Preterist understanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members



Could you explain the Jesuit doctrine in Rick's book?


The futurist teaching was invented by several Jesuits in cluding Bellarmine. This teaching was inveented to counter the Reformation teaching that the Pope was Antchrist. The Waldensians also believed that, from about 1200 AD. They had a document, Treatise on Antichrist, written about that time.

The pre tribulation rapture resulted from a book by Juan Josephat ben Ezra, A converted Jew, the Nom de Plume of South American Jesuit, Manuel Lacunza. There were several translations of this book, including one by Edward Irving, who taught himself Spanish in one month, in order to translate it. Irving was not the first Protestant to accept the P T Rapture teaching, that hounour went to an Anglican, the librarian to the Archbishop of Canterbury, a Mr Maitland in about 1825 who wrote on the subject. Irving was the Minister of the Scotch Church in London in the early 1800s and soon became a charismatic. Irving also had several teaching for which he was excommunicated. The first was on the humanity of Christ, the second was the righteousness of the believer, believing in an actual righteousness rather than an imputed righteousness. Several of Irving's prophets prophecied that this teaching was true including Robert Baxter who later retracted his prophecies and left the movement.

The irvingites then held annual prophetic conferences at Albury, London for a few years. One person who attended these conferences was Lady Powerscourt of Ireland who was an associate of the Brethren. who were beginning about 1829. She absorbed this teaching. Lady Powerscourt arranged prophetic conferences at her estate in Ireland which Irving and John Nelson Darby attended.
It was at one of these Conferences when Darby announced his theories regarding the ‘Rapture of the Church’, a dramatic end-times scenario that is adhered-to by millions of evangelical Christians to this day.
http://peebs.net/exclusive-brethren-history/the-writings-of-lady-theodosia-wingfield-powerscourt-viscountess-1800-1836. (Peebs is from a shortening of P. B, the Plymouth Brethren. My wife used to be in the Brethren and she referred to them as Peebs.)

The Brethren developed in the Plymouth area thus they were called Plymouth Brethren. For a number of years Pre Tribulation Rapturism was confined to those two groups and was widely considered to be a heresy. Then Darby travelled to America, and the teaching took off. The new teaching needed a new bible and along came Scofield and supplied the need.


Regarding Revelation, you & the futurists rely on interpretation unguided by Scripture. Preterists rely on the understanding of Scripture, guided by Scripture itself.


We rely on the symbols in scripture which are explained in scripture.

e.g. We see the references to the destruction of the temple in 2 Thes. 2 & Rev. 11 as referring to the prophesied destruction of the temple.

That view depends on an early date for revelation, which is a very doubtful interpretation. It is not just contradicted but Irenius, but every other early writer I have read.

I won't fall out with David for his historicism - I preached right through Rev. guided by Hendriksen before I understood from a Preterist understanding.


I believe that most Grace Baptists would hold to the teaching of Hendriksen, who I believe was an A-millenialist. I have never read Hendriksen but I know that Grace Baptists that I have spoken to believe that the Book of Revelation gives seven parallel interpretations of church history. I do not believe that.

A Grace Baptist pastor I spoke to said he beleived that, but seemed to think the interpretations were general rather thaqn specific. Edited by Invicta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Members

"blah, blah, blah, blah, blah....."


"For all the saints and the Elect of God are gathered, prior to the tribulation that is to come, and are taken to the Lord lest they see the confusion that is to overwhelm the world because of our sins."

Ephrem the Syrian, On the Last Times, the Antichrist, and the End of the World, 373 A.D.

Edited by Rick Schworer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...