Jump to content
  • Welcome to Online Baptist

    Free to join.

Recommended Posts

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
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.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"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

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"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.


That is a very dismissive and weak refutation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites



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. 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.




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

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 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.


Some of this is unfamiliar to me, mostly the Jesuit parts, while I've read at least some regarding the rest.

What was the Baptist view on this while all of this was going on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Some of this is unfamiliar to me, mostly the Jesuit parts, while I've read at least some regarding the rest.

What was the Baptist view on this while all of this was going on?

A test for Biblical orthodoxy is NOT "which heretics have included this doctrine (whatever) in their doctrine?"

Also ALL Christians & heretics include baptism of converts as the entrance to their church, so your question can be answered by "confusion." Evangelical Christian baptists always hold a range of eschatological views, as evidenced in this thread.

Is YOUR view taught explicitly in Scripture, or inferred from Scripture, or is it a scheme taught by man or college & supported by reference to Scripture?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Where does Jesus teach a future millennium?
2. Where does Paul teach a future millennium?
3. Where does Peter teach a future millennium?
4. Where does James teach a future millennium?
5. Where does Jude teach a future millennium?
6. What is the nature of the millennium in John's teaching?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"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.

Ephrem is presumably quoting Paul:

2 Thes. 1:3We are bound to thank God always for you, brethren, as it is meet, because that your faith groweth exceedingly, and the charity of every one of you all toward each other aboundeth;

4So that we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that ye endure:

5Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer:

6Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;

7And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,

8In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

9Who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power;

10When he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe (because our testimony among you was believed) in that day.


Or Jesus:

Mat. 13:37He answered and said unto them, He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man;

38The field is the world; the good seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children of the wicked one;

39The enemy that sowed them is the devil; the harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels.

40As therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it be in the end of this world.

41The Son of man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that offend, and them which do iniquity;

42And shall cast them into a furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.

43Then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.

The rapture we will enjoy is the resurrection of the just, & the tribulation the wicked suffer is hell.

John 5:28Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice,

29And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


A test for Biblical orthodoxy is NOT "which heretics have included this doctrine (whatever) in their doctrine?"

Also ALL Christians & heretics include baptism of converts as the entrance to their church, so your question can be answered by "confusion." Evangelical Christian baptists always hold a range of eschatological views, as evidenced in this thread.

Is YOUR view taught explicitly in Scripture, or inferred from Scripture, or is it a scheme taught by man or college & supported by reference to Scripture?


Agreed. Scripture is our authority.

From my own study, much of what some Baptists hold to today is different than what many held to previously. Some folks know more of Baptist history than I, which is why I asked the question to see if anyone had something to add which I might not be aware of. Without a doubt, those calling themselves Baptists today are all over the spectrum, with Calvinists and non-Calvinists, pre-mils and A-mils, etc.

Anyway, since it was stated what the Plymouth Brethren were teaching, I was simply wondering if anyone knew what Baptists were teaching at that time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. Where does Jesus teach a future millennium?
2. Where does Paul teach a future millennium?
3. Where does Peter teach a future millennium?
4. Where does James teach a future millennium?
5. Where does Jude teach a future millennium?
6. What is the nature of the millennium in John's teaching?


Brother, we've already been from Dan to Beersheba on this, and you've yet to explain the differences from the Millennial Kingdom and the Everlasting Kingdom, among a host of other things. You apply all the really great Old Testament prophesies of a future kingdom to the New Heavens and New Earth, but ignore the counterdictions that such an interpretation leaves you with when you read Revelation. There are two kingdoms, a Millennial and an Everlasting, in one people live very long (much longer than now) and still die and there is a sea, in the other no one ever dies and there is no sea according to Revelation.

You also completely disregard the painstaking detail in fifteen chapters of Revelation concerning a future Tribulation period as being one isolated event in 70 A.D., ignoring the fact that when Jesus spoke of the Great Tribulation He said it's so catastrophic the world has never seen anything like it before and will never see anything like it again, that is, seven years of Hell on Earth as described in Revelation.

You and I have already been there, done that, and bought the t-shirt. In my experience with you, you typically answer about 20% of my questions and I answer about 90% of yours. God bless you brother, you know I love you in the Lord, but I really don't have the time or the patience to go through it all over again with you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites


A test for Biblical orthodoxy is NOT "which heretics have included this doctrine (whatever) in their doctrine?"

Also ALL Christians & heretics include baptism of converts as the entrance to their church, so your question can be answered by "confusion." Evangelical Christian baptists always hold a range of eschatological views, as evidenced in this thread.

Is YOUR view taught explicitly in Scripture, or inferred from Scripture, or is it a scheme taught by man or college & supported by reference to Scripture?



No, that is not true, some require pouring and or sprinkling, and neither of these is supported by the Bible, the Bible way is full immersion, and one has not been baptized until they have been fully immersed as Jesus was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To come back to the thread question, the underlying question is "When did the kingdom of God come with power?"

The chapter divisions are not inspired, & we need to read from the previous chapter to see if that is relevant.

Mar 8:38 Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels.
Mar 9:1 ¶ And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.
2 ¶ And after six days Jesus taketh [with him] Peter, and James, and John, and leadeth them up into an high mountain apart by themselves: and he was transfigured before them.

Peter quotes prophecy that speaks of Jesus' resurrection & ascension to his heavenly throne. (Acts 2) Also Jesus had previously prophesied: Act 1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: so Pentecost is a possible interpretation of Mark 9, though it does not tally with the closing verses of Mark 8.

Some have argued previously that the church age is not the kingdom of God & look beyond the present age to a yet future millennium. That interpretation requires the millennium to begin while some of them that stand here were still alive.





Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




No, that is not true, some require pouring and or sprinkling, and neither of these is supported by the Bible, the Bible way is full immersion, and one has not been baptized until they have been fully immersed as Jesus was.


That is true, Brother Jerry.

The Brethren I have come across have been Baptist, but I do know some who have been associated with Exclusive Brethren who practice infant Baptism.

Brother John

As to what Baptists believed before the Brethren. The 1689 Baptist confession teaches that the Pope was the Antichrist, as did the Independants, and the reformers as well as before the reformation the Waldensians and others.

The information I gave takes quite a bit of reading and you can find it in histories of the Irvingites as well as history of the Brethren.

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Loading...

Article Categories

About Us

Since 2001, Online Baptist has been an Independent Baptist website, and we exclusively use the King James Version of the Bible. We pride ourselves on a community that uplifts the Lord.

Contact Us

You can contact us using the following link. Contact Us or for questions regarding this website please contact @pastormatt or email James Foley at jfoley@sisqtel.net

Android App

Online Baptist has a custom App for all android users. You can download it from the Google Play store or click the following icon.

×
×
  • Create New...