I scanned through your posts. I see, as others pointed out, that it comes down to various disagreements on how conclusions are arrived at. I'm content to leave it there.
Perilous times in the last days
- Thread starter Rescued
- Start date
- Status
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
If you have any links to Matthew Poole and other historicists on Matthew 24, I would be interested. I Have Henry and Gill.
I don't at the moment- I can barely keep up with conversations on historicism and other escahtological and theological nuances these days. I can ask our pastor; if I do come across anything of note, I'll post it.
Interesting points I still think that it's rather silly to not see what has happened and is still happening with the papacy as not satisfying the requirements of the prophecies concerning antichrist. Over 1000 years of fulfillment really is overkill when it comes to fulfilling prophecy. To say, no no there has to be so much more to it is I think a product of this age where we just can't get enough. Nothing is enough for us sensationalists in the West.
Revelation 17...doesn't that just wreak of Mother Rome. If she is not the Great Whore which did corrupt the earth with her fornication then who is? Note how John says her titles are written right across her forehead, i.e. it's obvious to the spiritually trained who she is.
I still think that it's rather impious to say that the people of God cannot look back on fulfilled prophecy and that it must be referring to something future when in fact these prophecies have been fulfilled.
Which prophecies about antichrist have not yet been fulfilled?
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Speaking as an impious one, I note that your conclusion sneaks into one of your premises. What I have bold faced is precisely what is under discussion. If you deleted the fulfilled part, it wouldn't be begging the question.
What's wrong with seeing that a prophecy has been fulfilled?
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Nothing in itself. I thought you were saying the indicators or parts of the prophecy of the Man of Sin have already been fulfilled in the Pope, and I was disputing that as the very thing to be proved.
I believe the prophecies about the man of sin have been fulfilled in the rise and reign of the papacy over a period of over a thousand years. I think the burden rests on those who disagree with that belief to show which prophecies have NOT been fulfilled by the papacy. With that said, which prophecies concerning the man of sin do you believe have not been fulfilled and what or who would you say could do it better than the pope?
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
I don't accept the burden of proof and see no reason why I should. As to the specific prophecies not fulfilled:
1) The falling away
2) The revelation of the Man of Sin (which can only happen after (1))
3) Abomination of desolation
4 Great Tribulation (and (3) causes (4))
I summarized some historicist writers (who agree with me on particulars) here.
Historicists on Matthew 24
The key to remember is that the abomination of desolation causes the Great Tribulation. The language doesn’t allow any separation in the events of v.15 and v.21. It stands to reason that Titu…
tentsofshem.wordpress.com
aaronsk
Puritan Board Freshman
Grace-eBooks.com
Grace-eBooks.com making available free eBooks useful in your Bible studies.
Because it's been the belief among faithful Christians since the dark ages and even before. So the burden rests on you to disprove them. Everything you state has happened, you're just not willing to see the events for what they were.I don't accept the burden of proof and see no reason why I should. As to the specific prophecies not fulfilled:
1) The falling away
2) The revelation of the Man of Sin (which can only happen after (1))
3) Abomination of desolation
4 Great Tribulation (and (3) causes (4))
I summarized some historicist writers (who agree with me on particulars) here.
Historicists on Matthew 24
The key to remember is that the abomination of desolation causes the Great Tribulation. The language doesn’t allow any separation in the events of v.15 and v.21. It stands to reason that Titu…
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
1. It is not as simple as "it's been the belief." I refuse to grant the point that the papacy qua papacy existed back then. That gives Rome a degree of historical continuity that I refuse to grant them.
2. While not strictly a refutation, I did offer some problems with historicism. In fact, I did that several times.
You're making it sound like the truth is determined by you. Not that they had a corner on the truth, but I choose to join in with our Protestant fathers in their belief about this. Anyway it's been nice discussing this. Thanks.
This is a great book on the subject:
Amazon.com: The History of Protestantism; Volume 1: Books 1-9 (The History of Protestantism Volumes) eBook : Wylie, James Aitken: Kindle Store
Amazon.com: The History of Protestantism; Volume 1: Books 1-9 (The History of Protestantism Volumes) eBook : Wylie, James Aitken: Kindle Store
www.amazon.com
Last edited:
Jerusalem Blade
Puritan Board Professor
Jeremy, you said, "I think the burden rests on those who disagree with that belief to show which prophecies have NOT been fulfilled by the papacy." Fair enough.
In Revelation 19:19,20,21 it is written,
This has not happened yet. The papacy is still living and breathing.
This final battle – Armageddon – was referred to again in Rev 16:13,14,16,17 :
An overview of this final battle, where the beast, false prophet (aka beast from the land) and the dragon are destroyed is seen yet again in Revelation 20:7,8,9,10 :
To summarize these Scriptures, in the first, Rev 19:19 and following, we see both the beast and the false prophet cast into the lake of fire; please note, it is two individuals cast into it – and this is the very end of the age, as not only are "the kings of the earth, and their armies" destroyed, but "the remnant [of unbelieving humankind] were slain". This prophecy remains unfulfilled.
In the second, the final battle "of that great day of God Almighty" – "the kings of the earth and of the whole world" are destroyed and, as the following verses make clear, this seventh vail (or bowl) signifies the end of the present world. Of God's plan it is said, "It is done." This prophecy hasn't happened yet.
And lastly, in Rev 20:7 and following, the end of the world is again revealed, where a global attack on the people of God is mounted, in the midst of which the Lord returns to rescue them, and to wreak vengeance on the attackers, lead by the devil who is thrown in the lake of fire where the two beasts have also been cast. This has not happened yet.
We still see the papal system, and the popes, yet alive and walking the earth, along with all those on earth who bear the mark of the beast. There remains a final conflict between the saints and the children of the whore and their leaders, the devil, beast, and false prophet, and the destruction of these latter.
The well-meant but thoroughly inadequate view of Historicism is shown to omit the denouement of God's plan for the age – the most important part, really, for us who look for "the Day of the LORD" / the "great day of God Almighty" when "the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ" (Tit. 2:13) shall arrive. We long to see our Saviour face to face on that great day, which is our blessed hope.
In Revelation 19:19,20,21 it is written,
"And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army. And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh."
This has not happened yet. The papacy is still living and breathing.
This final battle – Armageddon – was referred to again in Rev 16:13,14,16,17 :
And I saw three unclean spirits like frogs come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty...
And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon. And the seventh angel poured out his vial into the air; and there came a great voice out of the temple of heaven, from the throne, saying, It is done.
And he gathered them together into a place called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon. And the seventh angel poured out his vial into the air; and there came a great voice out of the temple of heaven, from the throne, saying, It is done.
An overview of this final battle, where the beast, false prophet (aka beast from the land) and the dragon are destroyed is seen yet again in Revelation 20:7,8,9,10 :
And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them. And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever.
To summarize these Scriptures, in the first, Rev 19:19 and following, we see both the beast and the false prophet cast into the lake of fire; please note, it is two individuals cast into it – and this is the very end of the age, as not only are "the kings of the earth, and their armies" destroyed, but "the remnant [of unbelieving humankind] were slain". This prophecy remains unfulfilled.
In the second, the final battle "of that great day of God Almighty" – "the kings of the earth and of the whole world" are destroyed and, as the following verses make clear, this seventh vail (or bowl) signifies the end of the present world. Of God's plan it is said, "It is done." This prophecy hasn't happened yet.
And lastly, in Rev 20:7 and following, the end of the world is again revealed, where a global attack on the people of God is mounted, in the midst of which the Lord returns to rescue them, and to wreak vengeance on the attackers, lead by the devil who is thrown in the lake of fire where the two beasts have also been cast. This has not happened yet.
We still see the papal system, and the popes, yet alive and walking the earth, along with all those on earth who bear the mark of the beast. There remains a final conflict between the saints and the children of the whore and their leaders, the devil, beast, and false prophet, and the destruction of these latter.
The well-meant but thoroughly inadequate view of Historicism is shown to omit the denouement of God's plan for the age – the most important part, really, for us who look for "the Day of the LORD" / the "great day of God Almighty" when "the blessed hope and glorious appearing of our great God and Savior Jesus Christ" (Tit. 2:13) shall arrive. We long to see our Saviour face to face on that great day, which is our blessed hope.
I was talking about the prophecies identifying the papacy, not about everything it is said will happen in relation to it still in the future. The distinction between the beast and the false prophet is really not a distinction since the woman rides the beast (the papacy assumed the power of imperial Rome when Rome morphed into the church state system) The Lord destroying it with the brightness of His coming has not happened yet. But if we look at I Thessalonians 5 and 2 Peter 3 both passages make it clear that the Day of the Lord is coming as a thief in the night. Nobody knows when it will be. It could be today, it could be another thousand years from now. And the scriptures are given in such a way as to make it impossible to know what Day He is coming that we may ever be ready to stand before Him. So to make it necessary for all kinds of things to happen before Christ returns is contrary to the overall message of scripture. A thief comes in the night when we don't expect.
Have a nice day.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Very true, but Scripture does give some pointers in 2 Thess. 2. First will come the apostasy, then the revelation of the man of sin, then (logically, not necessarily a long temporal sequence) the Day of the Lord.
Not at all. Truth is determined by the nature of things. I simply believe that I have offered reasons why it favors me and not you.
Pointing out the obvious (!), but interpretation of the ‘when’ and ‘what’ of that passage is what much of the conversation has been hinging on. Pastor Todd Ruddell, in a lecture series he did on the topic, mentioned Thomas Manton several times, so I looked about and found Manton’s “18 sermons on 2 Thessalonians 2”. I hope it’s a helpful resource. https://www.apuritansmind.com/purit...scription-rise-growth-and-fall-of-antichrist/
The lectures from Rev. Todd Ruddell: http://www.christcovenantrpc.org/audio/conferences-lectures/pope-is-antichrist/
Last edited:
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
That's true to a point. As Reformed Protestants, we need to be careful of saying the Great Apostasy happened early in church history. That's the Trail of Blood teaching, which we must reject. If his position holds, then he must say the Great Apostasy has already happened. I maintain that is a fatal price to pay.
Another problem is tying that interpretation to Matthew 24. I linked to those historicist difficulties earlier.
Of course, there’s a sound and coherent scheme in historicist takes on 2 Thessalonians 2 and Matthew 24, which although I have traced it out and appreciated it as sound and valid in the past, I cannot articulate it as can someone more studied (and more specifically a holder of the teaching office in the church) can do. Thankfully it’s all out there for the studying and pondering. There again, I’m inclined to prefer to go to able, thoroughly confessional ministers of the gospel for help with these things, who in turn draw from and point to wise commentators, past and present.
Jerusalem Blade
Puritan Board Professor
Jeremy,
True, as a thief in the night the Lord shall come – either taking us out of this life, or at His parousia – unexpectedly, yet He told the Jews, "can ye not discern the signs of the times?" (Matt 16:3). That statement of His referred to the visitation of God manifest in the flesh, the long-awaited Messiah.
To us, further down the annals of time, we have His prophetic word, even as the Jews of old had the writings of Daniel to warn them of things to come – actual events to come – namely the ravages of Antiochus Epiphanes. The wise among them knew that even the ceasing of the one place in all the world where God had appointed His worship at the hands of a truly wicked man, was appointed by Him to chasten His people, and they should stay upon their God even in such darkness.
And we – even now in the 21st century – amidst an encroaching darkness that seems to be stealthily covering the earth, from the West to the East, from the North to the South, we hear the grinding of gears that portend legal actions against the people of God to silence them, and among the increasingly hostile peoples of earth we hear threats of violence. In quite a few nations already the threats are acted on and our people are killed like lambs for the slaughter. There is something vast and evil afoot, far greater than the woke and deluded pontiff. Even if a fiercer one than he were to arise, how much credibility do you think such a one would have, even in his own "church", or among the neo-pagans of the world, or the Islamists, or communists?
Can you envisage this papal character leading the kings and rulers of the whole world to war against Christ and His people, to the battle of that great day of God Almighty? (Rev 16:13,14).
We are warned in the final prophecy – John's Apocalypse – of terrible things to come, far worse than your stuck hindsight on Rome, rising from the grassroots of a sorcery-sodden culture (and cultures) quite at ease among demonic influence and presence. The Reformers, for all the solidity, light, and grace they afforded us, were in an entirely different world than we inhabit now – they would be mightily shocked and stunned to see the things we are seeing. Their nascent eschatology was darkened by their lack of familiarity with the profound evil we are amidst now, and here you are, Jeremy, seeking to bring us back to this primitive vision of the world, a world we no longer live in. You would bring us back to a time of small spiritual vision, eschatologically. The book of Revelation does not support such anachronistic views as you promote, not applicable for the saints in our time.
Our great need is to prepare for a profounder evil than our forebears knew, one enhanced by remarkable technology and heavily armed force, supported by politicians cursed with God-sent "strong delusion" (2 Thess 2:11), who are preparing our nation (the U.S.) and other Western nations, for a new world order where the Christian faith and its Bible is seen as the source of societal hate and hate speech, and to be outlawed.
Rome may defect from its blasphemous moorings and join the new Hell-bent throng, but it is most unlikely to be a leader of it. It is not without reason that the American version of the Westminster standards (circa 1936) changed the original, removing the statement that the Roman Catholic pope was the (rather than an) antichrist, so my view is not at all against our PB confessional requirement in this matter (my subscription is to the Three Forms of Unity – check my profile for details if any want).
It is a very serious thing, putting blinders on our eyes, like brute horses so they are not distracted by sights peripheral vision may pick up. We need to be alert to the times we are in – we are no longer in the 16th and 17th centuries! – and evil has taken new forms and energies. In the wise providence of our King and Guide, He has given us teachers who hold to and well teach the Amillennial (aka present millennium) understanding of eschatology, and in particular Revelation.
I am having a nice day, Jeremy, as the Saviour has granted me a respite from death (near fatal heart attack in June 2021) to be able to defend His final prophecy to the churches, applicable to the first century, and every century up through the age unto our own 21st, and teach what may be known as "modified idealism" (per G.K. Beale, et al), that we not go into the coming meat grinder unaware and spiritually unprepared.
True, as a thief in the night the Lord shall come – either taking us out of this life, or at His parousia – unexpectedly, yet He told the Jews, "can ye not discern the signs of the times?" (Matt 16:3). That statement of His referred to the visitation of God manifest in the flesh, the long-awaited Messiah.
To us, further down the annals of time, we have His prophetic word, even as the Jews of old had the writings of Daniel to warn them of things to come – actual events to come – namely the ravages of Antiochus Epiphanes. The wise among them knew that even the ceasing of the one place in all the world where God had appointed His worship at the hands of a truly wicked man, was appointed by Him to chasten His people, and they should stay upon their God even in such darkness.
And we – even now in the 21st century – amidst an encroaching darkness that seems to be stealthily covering the earth, from the West to the East, from the North to the South, we hear the grinding of gears that portend legal actions against the people of God to silence them, and among the increasingly hostile peoples of earth we hear threats of violence. In quite a few nations already the threats are acted on and our people are killed like lambs for the slaughter. There is something vast and evil afoot, far greater than the woke and deluded pontiff. Even if a fiercer one than he were to arise, how much credibility do you think such a one would have, even in his own "church", or among the neo-pagans of the world, or the Islamists, or communists?
Can you envisage this papal character leading the kings and rulers of the whole world to war against Christ and His people, to the battle of that great day of God Almighty? (Rev 16:13,14).
We are warned in the final prophecy – John's Apocalypse – of terrible things to come, far worse than your stuck hindsight on Rome, rising from the grassroots of a sorcery-sodden culture (and cultures) quite at ease among demonic influence and presence. The Reformers, for all the solidity, light, and grace they afforded us, were in an entirely different world than we inhabit now – they would be mightily shocked and stunned to see the things we are seeing. Their nascent eschatology was darkened by their lack of familiarity with the profound evil we are amidst now, and here you are, Jeremy, seeking to bring us back to this primitive vision of the world, a world we no longer live in. You would bring us back to a time of small spiritual vision, eschatologically. The book of Revelation does not support such anachronistic views as you promote, not applicable for the saints in our time.
Our great need is to prepare for a profounder evil than our forebears knew, one enhanced by remarkable technology and heavily armed force, supported by politicians cursed with God-sent "strong delusion" (2 Thess 2:11), who are preparing our nation (the U.S.) and other Western nations, for a new world order where the Christian faith and its Bible is seen as the source of societal hate and hate speech, and to be outlawed.
Rome may defect from its blasphemous moorings and join the new Hell-bent throng, but it is most unlikely to be a leader of it. It is not without reason that the American version of the Westminster standards (circa 1936) changed the original, removing the statement that the Roman Catholic pope was the (rather than an) antichrist, so my view is not at all against our PB confessional requirement in this matter (my subscription is to the Three Forms of Unity – check my profile for details if any want).
It is a very serious thing, putting blinders on our eyes, like brute horses so they are not distracted by sights peripheral vision may pick up. We need to be alert to the times we are in – we are no longer in the 16th and 17th centuries! – and evil has taken new forms and energies. In the wise providence of our King and Guide, He has given us teachers who hold to and well teach the Amillennial (aka present millennium) understanding of eschatology, and in particular Revelation.
I am having a nice day, Jeremy, as the Saviour has granted me a respite from death (near fatal heart attack in June 2021) to be able to defend His final prophecy to the churches, applicable to the first century, and every century up through the age unto our own 21st, and teach what may be known as "modified idealism" (per G.K. Beale, et al), that we not go into the coming meat grinder unaware and spiritually unprepared.
Last edited:
Physeter
Puritan Board Freshman
I have found in my own studies, that futuristic Eschatological speculations are unproductive. Dispensationalism has led to a lot of wild speculation that just isn't true. I have had to bite my tongue on most forums as an amillennialist.
We do have an apostate system at work in the form of Roman Catholicism. The Catholic institution has been rocked with sexual scandal. It is an antichrist system But is it The Anti Christ? There were periods in history when it did things to people who were not Catholics that were just frankly evil. There are things just as dark and evil at work in our world today but they are not under the banner of Rome. We have governments declaring the teachings of the Bible evil because there are scriptures that declare certain sins as abominations and that people who practice them will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. We have institutionalized child abuse in the form of transgender kids. There are laws that penalize people for calling a transgender by the gender they actually are.
There have been periods in history where there has been rank evil. During the Roman empire, Nero had Christians thrown to the lions or crucified. During WWII Hitler had Jews and the Christians that helped them burned in ovens. It goes in cycles. It will continue to do so until the end of this age.
We do have an apostate system at work in the form of Roman Catholicism. The Catholic institution has been rocked with sexual scandal. It is an antichrist system But is it The Anti Christ? There were periods in history when it did things to people who were not Catholics that were just frankly evil. There are things just as dark and evil at work in our world today but they are not under the banner of Rome. We have governments declaring the teachings of the Bible evil because there are scriptures that declare certain sins as abominations and that people who practice them will not enter the Kingdom of Heaven. We have institutionalized child abuse in the form of transgender kids. There are laws that penalize people for calling a transgender by the gender they actually are.
There have been periods in history where there has been rank evil. During the Roman empire, Nero had Christians thrown to the lions or crucified. During WWII Hitler had Jews and the Christians that helped them burned in ovens. It goes in cycles. It will continue to do so until the end of this age.
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Not all futurists engage in speculation, nor are all futurists dispensationalists. I know you didn't exactly say that, but your words implied it. I am an amillennialist and a futurist.
ZackF
Puritan Board Professor
I thought you were historical premil?
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
I mentioned the change here. I was actually pre-wrath premil, and I still think Alan Kurschner is easily one of the top 3 debaters on eschatology today.
Eschatology change
I've been premil since 2012. I think it is easier to read Revelation 20 in an amil framework. I now consider myself "futurist amil." Some issues: 1) I still hold to much of Alan Kurschner's reading of Matthew 24. And if his reading is correct, it demands something like a future Antichrist...
Physeter
Puritan Board Freshman
I am not that familiar with futurism outside of Dispensationalism. I was raised in the Stone Campbellism movement. I do believe Christ's return is in the future, but when that will happen is unknown.
I am now an amillennialist.
Jerusalem Blade
Puritan Board Professor
To my understanding, the terms "futurists" and "futurism" generally apply to Dispensationalism and Premillennialism, and so the terms have been locked into erroneous concepts – those primarily being that Revelation's visions and symbolism of the end times exclude the churches (and events impacting them) throughout the NT age and only pertain to the very end of the age. This is patently false, as persecutions and antichrists and saving providences from God have attended His bride from the very beginning, just becoming greatly intensified – and global – as the eschaton draws near.
So the Bible itself – and its eschatological teachings – do show some events that are future to almost all the ages of the NT church, as they materialize in a final great conflict where the church's war – its firm testimony – is against the devil and demonized humankind, to the end of calling God's elect out of the Babylonian world and to Himself, and warning all that the Day of God's final Judgment and manifestation of His glory is ever drawing nearer. The devil and his hordes war back by killing the saints who thus testify against them. In the midst of that final conflict, the Lord of hosts returns to call His bride to Himself, and to destroy in fierce vengeance all the wicked who have harmed her.
So one is not a "futurist" simply because he or she rightly declares that there are prophecies that come to pass in the future, but merely a faithful herald of things yet to come, per Christ's own revelation.
So the Bible itself – and its eschatological teachings – do show some events that are future to almost all the ages of the NT church, as they materialize in a final great conflict where the church's war – its firm testimony – is against the devil and demonized humankind, to the end of calling God's elect out of the Babylonian world and to Himself, and warning all that the Day of God's final Judgment and manifestation of His glory is ever drawing nearer. The devil and his hordes war back by killing the saints who thus testify against them. In the midst of that final conflict, the Lord of hosts returns to call His bride to Himself, and to destroy in fierce vengeance all the wicked who have harmed her.
So one is not a "futurist" simply because he or she rightly declares that there are prophecies that come to pass in the future, but merely a faithful herald of things yet to come, per Christ's own revelation.
Physeter
Puritan Board Freshman
I would actually call myself a Historicist Amil - leaning more heavily to the Amil side.
Scottish Presbyterian
Puritan Board Sophomore
What is Trail of Blood teaching, and why must we reject it? And, assuming Trail of Blood teaching must be rejected (which I dont know as I don't know what it is), and that it teaches an early Apostasy, why is rejecting an early Apostasy on that basis not an example of the Genetic fallacy (of which we know you are so fond)?
Also, why is admitting an early Apostasy a fatal price to pay? Is your position basically that Historicism must be wrong because if we accept it then we must reject Futurism? If so, how is that different from assuming your conclusion?
RamistThomist
Puritanboard Clerk
Early church quickly, if not immediately descended into heresy and only small, hidden (and otherwise unknown) groups kept the gospel alive. We reject it because we are Reformers, we believe the church should be reformed, which implies an existing structure.
It's only a fallacy if I say something is logically wrong because of its origin. I didn't say that. I said we probably shouldn't use the same historiography that fringe Baptists use.
Do you like Nicea?
No, I never said that. I linked several articles on why historicism is exegetically untenable. It also posits the pope leading the armies of Antichrist against Jerusalem, which seems really bizarre.
Scottish Presbyterian
Puritan Board Sophomore
1. OK, the immediately bit is obviously wrong, but define quickly. Standard historicist position is that the falling away described in 2 Thessalonians 2 - although the seeds of it were in motion in Paul's day (he said it was already working) - began in earnest shortly after the fall of the Roman Empire. In my book that counts as early in church history, does that make me a proponent of this Trail of Blood theory?
2. You said "As Reformed Protestants, we need to be careful of saying the Great Apostasy happened early in church history. That's the Trail of Blood teaching, which we must reject." That's pretty close to saying it's wrong because of it's origin, or at least because of who else holds it.
3. Yes, but Nicea was pre fall of the Roman Empire (see 1), so not sure why that makes a difference. Pre-Nicea and right at the end of time are not the only 2 options here.
4. I'll try to get round to reading them. I think your interpretation of leading armies is a little wooden. In any normal understanding of leading armies, the papacy leading in war isn't bizarre at all, it's a recurring theme of history. That said, supposing it were bizarre, not sure why that should make you think it's wrong. The Euphrates being dried and the leaved sluice gates under Babylon being opened to Cyrus likely seemed bizarre to people who read Isaiah's prophecy - still happened though.
- Status
Similar threads
