What Would Futurists and Preterists Think if They Only Knew?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Ralph Waldvogel

Puritan Board Freshman
What would Protestant/Fundamentalist Baptist Futurists and Preterists think if they knew that their systems were both created by the Roman Catholic Jesuit priests Ribera and Alcazar, respectively, to take the focus off the present-day pope/papal system as the Antichrist, just to push the focus from the present into the future or past?
 
Huh?

Are you asserting that all those named are toadying to Rome?

It's an old historicist argument (and logical fallacy). It goes like this: Rome invented preterism and futurism to take the heat off of the pope's being the Antichrist. Historically, it's untenable since you can find a number of church fathers who had no connection to Rome but holding to some sort of futurist reading.
 
What would Protestant/Fundamentalist Baptist Futurists and Preterists think if they knew that their systems were both created by the Roman Catholic Jesuit priests Ribera and Alcazar, respectively, to take the focus off the present-day pope/papal system as the Antichrist, just to push the focus from the present into the future or past?
I would ask was the theology actually found in the scriptures or not first of all?
 
Hope that was not a paedobaptist baby that is being thrown out with the water. Although thinking about it, there is too much water!
 
What would Protestant/Fundamentalist Baptist Futurists and Preterists think if they knew that their systems were both created by the Roman Catholic Jesuit priests Ribera and Alcazar, respectively, to take the focus off the present-day pope/papal system as the Antichrist, just to push the focus from the present into the future or past?
Please substantiate the assertion with some factual information.
 
What would Protestant/Fundamentalist Baptist Futurists and Preterists think if they knew that their systems were both created by the Roman Catholic Jesuit priests Ribera and Alcazar, respectively, to take the focus off the present-day pope/papal system as the Antichrist, just to push the focus from the present into the future or past?
Its not true. Most of the church fathers believed the Olivet Discourse spoke of 70 AD.
 
Nearly 30 hours since the first post I'm tempted to think that the poster staged some guerilla warfare tactic, assault and immediately retreat without having to take any heat on the post.
 
Its not true. Most of the church fathers believed the Olivet Discourse spoke of 70 AD.

I know some Reformed guys who say the church fathers were Catholic. A Reformed friend of mine on Facebook unfriended me when he saw my library and it had the church fathers (and I had also talked about the institutional church). And he wasn't a baptist, either.
 
I would like to know how you arrived at this. In my humble opinion people are not smart enough to team together , form a conspiracy like this and have it stick together down through history. It would fall apart. Preterism and Dispensationalism are heterodoxies that formed apart from the Catholic Church.
 
Please explain these answers to my question. Rather than asserting, explain how do you come to this conclusion.
I think it is possible that there is a Romish/Jesuitical conspiracy that has insinuated itself into bible colleges, seminaries, and even the church itself. I may be wrong but I do not believe anything happens by accident. For nineteen hundred years most believed in the Protestant historicist interpretation; now everything is pretty much futurist dispensationalist premillennialist. Is this by accident? I do not think so. Then again, I could be wrong.
 
I think it is possible that there is a Romish/Jesuitical conspiracy that has insinuated itself into bible colleges, seminaries, and even the church itself. I may be wrong but I do not believe anything happens by accident. For nineteen hundred years most believed in the Protestant historicist interpretation; now everything is pretty much futurist dispensationalist premillennialist. Is this by accident? I do not think so. Then again, I could be wrong.
1900 years? I want to tread lightly here because yes, we can infer that many early church fathers, and even some Medieval theologians would back Protestantism of a sort and helped perpetuate it but, 'Protestantism' hasn't existed in the way we know it for 1900 years.
And yes dispensationalism is wrong, undoubtedly. Is it the Pope? Laughable. Conspiracies work with no evidence.
 
I think it is possible that there is a Romish/Jesuitical conspiracy that has insinuated itself into bible colleges, seminaries, and even the church itself. I may be wrong but I do not believe anything happens by accident. For nineteen hundred years most believed in the Protestant historicist interpretation; now everything is pretty much futurist dispensationalist premillennialist. Is this by accident? I do not think so. Then again, I could be wrong.
What has led you to "think it is possible that there is a Romish/Jesuitcal conspiracy" afoot in bible colleges, seminaries and the church?

I am still seeking something substantive underlying your opinions. As things stand, you are being needlessly provocative.
 
There were Jesuit conspiracies in European history, but not here. And the church for 1900 years was historicist only in the sense of viewing Revelation as unfolding in human history. The early church fathers did not think the Pope was the Antichrist (as the Pope didn't yet exist). They would have seen Antichrist as either an apostate Roman emperor or an Islamic figure.
 
For nineteen hundred years most believed in the Protestant historicist interpretation

You are going to need to start substantiating your claims if you want us to take you seriously. I suggest that you start cracking open a few books on basic theology, church history, and logic before posting again. I say that as one who agrees with the Irish Articles of Religion and the Westminster Confession that the Pope is the Antichrist. But please stop embarrassing yourself and the position you are seeking to advance by refusing to substantiate your wild accusations.
 
Heh. Those pesky Jesuits. They have insinuated themselves into all manner of public discourse.
rolleyes.gif
 
Heh. Those pesky Jesuits. They have insinuated themselves into all manner of public discourse.
rolleyes.gif

I believe it was the Jesuits who propagated Middle Knowledge and "confirmed" it by an appearance of the virgin Mary. I believe it was Warfield that said it it would take such an appearance to believe that nonsense........
 
I believe it was the Jesuits who propagated Middle Knowledge and "confirmed" it by an appearance of the virgin Mary. I believe it was Warfield that said it it would take such an appearance to believe that nonsense........
Indeed. My earlier post was an attempt at some self-deprecating humor. Click the AMR link in my sig to get "in" on the joke. ;)
 
Indeed. My earlier post was an attempt at some self-deprecating humor. Click the AMR link in my sig to get "in" on the joke. ;)

Ah....I see now. This may prove good fodder for some friendly banter in the future.:cheers2:

I, for one, am glad you are here as the man you are and not the one you once were!
 
If only all the Protestants, Baptists, etc. realized that they still haven't shaken off the chains of Romanism with their embrace of Trinitarianism....so say the Oneness Pentecostals. The SDAs argue similarly against Sunday Worship.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top