The Prophetic Timeline: Why Jesuit Futurists/Jesuit Preterists Ignore It

[Randy Kluth]

Randy, you're ignoring the difference between common vernacular word usage and prophetic passage word usage.

Phoneman, who set those supposed "rules"--you? Are you a language expert? Do you know Hebrew? Are you a Bible translation expert? Please cite scholars in these areas rather than just generate supposed "facts" out of thin air.

In Daniel 7, verses 17 and 23 set an undeniable precedent that "kings" and "kingdoms" are synonymous in prophetic passages - but Jesuit Futurism is found once gain moving the eschatological goal posts in order to legitimize itself, by not only denying the precedent, but also bringing prophetic time flow to a screeching halt between the Fourth Beast and the Ten Horns with the insertion of a "gap". Protestant Historicism requires no such cunningly devised fables.

Heretic Marcion apparently set a precedent for developing Scripture canon for the New Testament. But would you call the current list of NT canonical letters "Marcion precedent?" Neither would I say that Jesuit Futurism set a precedent for Futurist interpretation. As I've already told you, Futurist elements that today are called "Futurism" existed well before the Jesuits were even conceived of!

I didn't see that anywhere in the link I sent you which shows the ECFs were all Historicist, and he was certainly not a "Futurist" by any means. What makes you say that?

Don't you read your own links? The Title of your link: "Early Church Fathers were Historicist - H. Grattan Guinness." The portion "On Futurism" is particularly revealing inasmuch as it shows Guinness' concern with with the Futurist tendency to ignore present problems with Catholicism, as opposed to a strict rejection of future ideas such as a future Antichrist. At least, this appears to me to be somewhat debatable, looking at it in cursory fashion.

Guinness writes:
"As to the subject of antichrist, there was a universal agreement among them concerning the general idea of the prophecy, while there were differences as to details, these differences arising chiefly from the notion that the antichrist would be in some way Jewish as well as Roman. It is true they thought that the antichrist would be an individual man. Their early position sufficiently accounts for this. They had no conception and could have no conception of the true nature and length of the tremendous apostasy which was to set in upon the Christian Church. They were not prophets, and could not foresee that the Church was to remain nineteen centuries in the wilderness, through prolonged and bitter persecution under a succes of nominally Christian but apostate rulers, filling the place of the ancient Caesars and emulating their antichristian deeds. Had they known these things, we may well believe their views would have completely harmonized with those of historic interpreters of later times.
The Fathers went as far as they could go in the direction in which historical interpreters of these last days have traveled."

Here Guinness appears to acknowledge that prophetic fulfillment was on-going, even during the time of the Church Fathers. They believed in a future Antichrist, and thus, could not have been strict Historicists! Why don't you recognize that?

Because Jesuit Futurism doesn't distinguish itself as a steaming pile of excrement scooped from the top of the "Roman dunghill of decretals" until after the Fourth Beast! Good gravy, man, that's like saying there's no difference between MAGA Republicans and BLM Democrats because they both wear baseball caps.

When someone has to go so far in attacking a Christian position, you have to wonder how inspired they were?

Jesuit Futurism flatly denies past fulfilled prophecies by disrupting the flow of prophetic time and inserting illegitimate "gaps" on the prophetic timeline. Protestant Historicism relies on no such eschatological skullduggery.

That's not true. Some current Futurism advocates would deny some historical fulfillments that I, as a Futurist, would hold to. For example, I'm a Futurist because I hold to a Future Antichrist and to the Future Salvation of National Israel. At the same time, I believe that the 1st Coming of Messiah was fulfilled in history, that the rise of the Roman Empire, BC and AD, is fulfilling biblical prophecy and is an on-going Futurist prophecy.

I do think the Roman Church has played a role in the development of Antichristian tendencies, although that has not always been the case. If the Roman Church is to fulfill the role of the Antichristian movement, it must be in the future because it has not happened yet. Antichrist is not here yet.

Yes, the "Israel of God" - the church, right?

England's greatest Protestant prophecy teacher, and yet you don't this? Friend, you have no business debating me on this, so please get back to me after you're done your homework, OK?

Ditto

If you want to debate as a Christian act like a Christian. I've done my homework--don't malign me when you don't know me.

 

[Phoneman777]

Being a SDA (Seventh Day Adventist) is a matter of personal choice. It is not a command from God.

So, you have no comment regarding Colossians 2 or Romans 14?

Are you satisfied with believing Romans 14 teaches we can eat anything that crawls across our plate despite Isaiah 66:15-17 KJV, or will you harmonize Scripture by confessing Romans 14 is talking about ceremonial Jewish Feast Days?

Are you satisfied that Colossians teaches we can ignore the Ten Commandments despite the entire list there containing only ceremonial "shadows" written by Moses, of which the Ten Commandments are no shadow?

What a day and age we live in where Christians prioritize first rock concert "worship" in mega churches and last Scriptural harmony.

 

[Douggg]

So, you have no comment regarding Colossians 2 or Romans 14?

Are you satisfied with believing Romans 14 teaches we can eat anything that crawls across our plate despite Isaiah 66:15-17 KJV, or will you harmonize Scripture by confessing Romans 14 is talking about ceremonial Jewish Feast Days?

Are you satisfied that Colossians teaches we can ignore the Ten Commandments despite the entire list there containing only ceremonial "shadows" written by Moses, of which the Ten Commandments are no shadow?

What a day and age we live in where Christians prioritize first rock concert "worship" in mega churches and last Scriptural harmony.

Did Jesus heal a man on the Sabbath ? 14 Bible verses about Jesus Healing On Sabbath

Matthew 22:
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

 

[Phoneman777]

Did Jesus heal a man on the Sabbath ? 14 Bible verses about Jesus Healing On Sabbath

Matthew 22:
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

It's lawful to do good on Sabbath, which includes healing illnesses, but we never read of Him being in the carpenter shop on Sabbath.

 

[ScottA]

Foreshadowings? Look, it's a fact that the Early Church knew what Paul told the Thessalonians about the Restrainer because that's how church works!

We know about Charles Stanley's "3 types of Christians" - one of which violates Revelation 22:18.
We know about Rick Warren's position against studying end times prophecy, which violates Revelation 1:3.
We know about Joel Osteen's "don't talk about sin" gospel which violates Matthew 4:4.
We know about Joyce Meyer's "messianic motivational speaker" gospel which violates common sense.

Well, the Early Church knew what Paul taught about the Restrainer, as well, and the ECFs who had anything to say about it all said Paul was referring to the Roman Empire. Who are we who lived nowhere near the time of Paul to argue with those who did live near it?

They were shortsighted, and not given the full knowledge of God according to the restraint and seal which was not to be given until just before the sounding of the seventh angel.

 

[Phoneman777]

They were shortsighted, and not given the full knowledge of God according to the restraint and seal which was not to be given until just before the sounding of the seventh angel.

You're still not getting it.

We're not discussing the extent of spiritual knowledge held by the ECFs.
We're not discussing what lack of spiritual knowledge hindered the ECFs.
We're not discussing the soundness of the eschatological interpretations of the ECFs.

What we're talking about is what people who lived in very close proximity to the early church got first, second, or third hand from those church members concerning what Paul said...understand now? Nobody's rumors...nobody's opinions...nobody's surmisings...but information disseminated and transmitted to posterity.

Now if you can't present a reasonable argument as to why Paul refused to mention your "Holy Spirit Restrainer" by name in his letter to the Thessalonians that can compete with my and the ECF's argument which says Paul told the Thessalonians the Restrainer was Pagan Rome and would not dare write about the "fall of Rome" in his letter - can you really say you're an objective student of prophecy?

 

[ScottA]

Now if you can't present a reasonable argument as to why Paul refused to mention your "Holy Spirit Restrainer" by name in his letter to the Thessalonians that can compete with my and the ECF's argument which says Paul told the Thessalonians the Restrainer was Pagan Rome and would not dare write about the "fall of Rome" in his letter - can you really say you're an objective student of prophecy?

Sure.

However, included in the scriptures (and thus my explanation) is the foretold derailment of all theology since that time: Jesus stated and warned of it, as did Peter, and also Paul.

Meanwhile, the pure word and promise(s) from God are also foretold.

In other words, there is an overriding agenda of God over the affairs of men in spite of their dealings, until all that is foretold of false teachings, delusion, and apostacy plays out. Which then, and only then, comes to a close just before the end. This is the claim from God since the beginning, specifically stated in the prophecy from Daniel, was eluded to by Paul, and then the "finish" was foretold by John in Revelation.

If you even only consider Daniel being told "Go your way, Daniel, for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end" (Daniel 12:9), combined with the "finish" of "the mystery of God" just before the end of time (Revelation 10), then nothing leading up to that time--including pagan Rome, is anything more than steps along the path and the aftermath of the "lie" "already at work" that was first believed among the early church.

 

[Douggg]

If you even only consider Daniel being told "Go your way, Daniel, for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end" (Daniel 12:9), combined with the "finish" of "the mystery of God" just before the end of time (Revelation 10)

end of time - will watches stop working ? No.

The verse in Revelation 10, means "no more delay", not that time will stop. No more delay, for in the days (a length of time) of the voice of the seventh angel the mystery of God should be finished - i.e. the Kingdom of God becoming the ruling kingdom here on earth over the nations.

The days length of time of the voice of the seventh angel will the time, times, half time that Satan will have left of his mystical kingdom of Babylon the great.

Revelation 10:6 And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:

7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.

When the seventh angel begins to sound that will be the signal for Michael and his angels to cast Satan and his angel down to earth from the second heaven. Satan will have great wrath, knowing that his time is short - i.e. a time, times, half time.

 

[ScottA]

end of time - will watches stop working ? No.

The verse in Revelation 10, means "no more delay", not that time will stop. No more delay, for in the days (a length of time) of the voice of the seventh angel the mystery of God should be finished - i.e. the Kingdom of God becoming the ruling kingdom here on earth over the nations.

The days length of time of the voice of the seventh angel will the time, times, half time that Satan will have left of his mystical kingdom of Babylon the great.

Revelation 10:6 And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:

7 But in the days of the voice of the seventh angel, when he shall begin to sound, the mystery of God should be finished, as he hath declared to his servants the prophets.

When the seventh angel begins to sound that will be the signal for Michael and his angels to cast Satan and his angel down to earth from the second heaven. Satan will have great wrath, knowing that his time is short - i.e. a time, times, half time.

That's you talking.

To the contrary, the scriptures speak of "The Beginning and The End."

As it is written: "Then comes the 'delay?'" No.

 

[Douggg]

That's you talking.

To the contrary, the scriptures speak of "The Beginning and The End."

As it is written: "Then comes the 'delay?'" No.

The text is not written"then comes....." Instead it is "that there should be......" time no longer, simply means no delay.

6 And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

You're still not getting it.

We're not discussing the extent of spiritual knowledge held by the ECFs.
We're not discussing what lack of spiritual knowledge hindered the ECFs.
We're not discussing the soundness of the eschatological interpretations of the ECFs.

What we're talking about is what people who lived in very close proximity to the early church got first, second, or third hand from those church members concerning what Paul said...understand now? Nobody's rumors...nobody's opinions...nobody's surmisings...but information disseminated and transmitted to posterity.

Now if you can't present a reasonable argument as to why Paul refused to mention your "Holy Spirit Restrainer" by name in his letter to the Thessalonians that can compete with my and the ECF's argument which says Paul told the Thessalonians the Restrainer was Pagan Rome and would not dare write about the "fall of Rome" in his letter - can you really say you're an objective student of prophecy?

I believe you're not getting it. The restraining Paul talked about in 2 Thessalonians 2 is in relation to the restraining of wickedness. Surely, it cannot be talking about Pagan Rome as the restrainer of wickedness.

2 Thessalonians 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. 5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

What is being restrained here? Iniquity. Wickedness. Paul said it was already at work in his day but was restrained until a future time during which a mass falling away from the faith would occur. In order to determine what is being restrained you have to start at the beginning of 2 Thess 2. Paul talked about a mass falling away from the faith in the future, so that obviously was not happening at that time. Why not? Because iniquity was being restrained. Not completely, of course, but to enough of an extent to allow the preaching of the gospel to go into the world. If there was no restraint on wickedness by the Holy Spirit then the gospel would just be drowned out by all the wickedness going on everywhere.

Jesus taught about a future time of a mass falling away from the faith and an increase in wickedness as well.

Matthew 24:10 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13 but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved.

So, what restrains wickedness to the point of preventing a mass falling away and an increase in wickedness until this time period comes? The Holy Spirit.

Now, with all this said, I am not supporting the way pre-tribs look at this as if Paul said the church has to be removed in order for the Holy Spirit to be taken away before the mass falling away and increase in wickedness occurs. No. I'm talking about the influence of the Holy Spirit here through the preaching of the gospel and such. He is going to give people who refuse to repent over to their wickedness at that time and won't contend with them any longer, which is why Paul wrote this:

2 Thess 2:9 The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie, 10 and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11 For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie 12 and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.

 

[ScottA]

The text is not written"then comes....." Instead it is "that there should be......" time no longer, simply means no delay.

6 And sware by him that liveth for ever and ever, who created heaven, and the things that therein are, and the earth, and the things that therein are, and the sea, and the things which are therein, that there should be time no longer:

Right, "time no longer."

The other quote I was referring to, was: 1Co 15:24.

 

[ScottA]

I believe you're not getting it. The restraining Paul talked about in 2 Thessalonians 2 is in relation to the restraining of wickedness. Surely, it cannot be talking about Pagan Rome as the restrainer of wickedness.

2 Thessalonians 2:3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. 5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time. 7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.

What is being restrained here? Iniquity. Wickedness. Paul said it was already at work in his day but was restrained until a future time during which a mass falling away from the faith would occur. In order to determine what is being restrained you have to start at the beginning of 2 Thess 2. Paul talked about a mass falling away from the faith in the future, so that obviously was not happening at that time. Why not? Because iniquity was being restrained. Not completely, of course, but to enough of an extent to allow the preaching of the gospel to go into the world. If there was no restraint on wickedness by the Holy Spirit then the gospel would just be drowned out by all the wickedness going on everywhere.

Jesus taught about a future time of a mass falling away from the faith and an increase in wickedness as well.

Matthew 24:10 At that time many will turn away from the faith and will betray and hate each other, 11 and many false prophets will appear and deceive many people. 12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, 13 but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved.

So, what restrains wickedness to the point of preventing a mass falling away and an increase in wickedness until this time period comes? The Holy Spirit.

Now, with all this said, I am not supporting the way pre-tribs look at this as if Paul said the church has to be removed in order for the Holy Spirit to be taken away before the mass falling away and increase in wickedness occurs. No. I'm talking about the influence of the Holy Spirit here through the preaching of the gospel and such. He is going to give people who refuse to repent over to their wickedness at that time and won't contend with them any longer, which is why Paul wrote this:

2 Thess 2:9 The coming of the lawless one will be in accordance with how Satan works. He will use all sorts of displays of power through signs and wonders that serve the lie, 10 and all the ways that wickedness deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved. 11 For this reason God sends them a powerful delusion so that they will believe the lie 12 and so that all will be condemned who have not believed the truth but have delighted in wickedness.

There is a different way of seeing it:

What is the general, all-time, restraint upon the earth and all its inhabitants? It is heaven and God Himself who guards (restrains) with flaming swords of fire, indeed, until the end.

In this way, Paul's elaborations are his way of beating around the bush about words unlawful to utter during those times--unlawful until the seventh seal is broken and the seventh angel begins to sound.

We also often read too much into certain passages. For example, the meaning of the word used by John to describe the one who spoke to him, is most commonly translated "angel." Likely because the message came to him "in the spirit." However, the word is actually quite broad, meaning: "a messenger; especially an "angel"; by implication, a pastor:—angel, messenger."

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

There is a different way of seeing it:

What is the general, all-time, restraint upon the earth and all its inhabitants? It is heaven and God Himself who guards (restrains) with flaming swords of fire, indeed, until the end.

In this way, Paul's elaborations are his way of beating around the bush about words unlawful to utter during those times--unlawful until the seventh seal is broken and the seventh angel begins to sound.

We also often read too much into certain passages. For example, the greater meaning of the word used by John to describe the one he say, most commonly translated, likely because the message came to him "in the spirit", is: "angel." But the word is actually quite broad, meaning: "a messenger; especially an "angel"; by implication, a pastor:—angel, messenger."

Vague as always. I hope you can understand what you're saying at least since I'm sure no one else can.

 

[ScottA]

Vague as always. I hope you can understand what you're saying at least since I'm sure no one else can.

It's easy to mock as you have.

Even so, I have been most reasonable in explaining that if there is any restraint--because God is in control, it is therefore God who restrains.

Which ought to change most interpretations.

 

[Phoneman777]

Sure.

However, included in the scriptures (and thus my explanation) is the foretold derailment of all theology since that time: Jesus stated and warned of it, as did Peter, and also Paul.

Meanwhile, the pure word and promise(s) from God are also foretold.

In other words, there is an overriding agenda of God over the affairs of men in spite of their dealings, until all that is foretold of false teachings, delusion, and apostacy plays out. Which then, and only then, comes to a close just before the end. This is the claim from God since the beginning, specifically stated in the prophecy from Daniel, was eluded to by Paul, and then the "finish" was foretold by John in Revelation.

If you even only consider Daniel being told "Go your way, Daniel, for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end" (Daniel 12:9), combined with the "finish" of "the mystery of God" just before the end of time (Revelation 10), then nothing leading up to that time--including pagan Rome, is anything more than steps along the path and the aftermath of the "lie" "already at work" that was first believed among the early church.

You're forgetting that "the secret things belong unto the Lord, but that which has been revealed...."

While some things remain known to God alone, His agenda is not about keeping us completely in the dark - to the contrary, "surely the Lord will do nothing unless He revealeth His secret to His servants the prophets."

So, what has He chosen to reveal to us? The answer is in this question: Does any thinking person really expect that the most solemn, dreadful, fearful warning to mankind in all of Scripture - to not take the "Mark of the Beast" in all its tragic results and consequences - would be given to mankind while keeping the identity of that Beast in secret, hidden from us?

My God doesn't operate like that. He doesn't stack the deck against us. He makes it abundantly clear to anyone who has eyes to see that Papal Rome is the Beast, the Restrainer preventing its rise was Pagan Rome, and that Jesuit Futurism and Jesuit Preterism are papal diversionary tactics to point the gullible away from what was universally proven, known, and taught by true Protestants worldwide until "protestants" became dissatisfied with the peace that swept over Christianity brought about by the papacy's "deadly wound".

I marvel at the number of prophecy "teachers" today who don't have a clue as to the identity of the Beast, but are prepared to "prove" to us 50 different ways what the Beast's "mark" is - like attempting to identify my "mark" signature on a guest list without first knowing what my name is.

 

[ScottA]

While some things remain known to God alone, His agenda is not about keeping us completely in the dark - to the contrary, "surely the Lord will do nothing unless He revealeth His secret to His servants the prophets."

This is the point where your hypothesis goes off track. Many do the same thing, saying "God is not the author of confusion." Which is simply an emotional response resulting in error and misunderstanding.

However, in the greater reality of God it is He in fact that created confusion:

"Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech” (Genesis 11:7).​

Which is "restraint" made manifest--that "flaming sword" of fire...until "He is taken out of the way" just before the end.

As for what has been revealed by His servants the prophets, those have been breadcrumbs "precept upon precept, Line upon line, line upon line, Here a little, there a little" (Isaiah 28:13).

 

[Phoneman777]

This is the point where your hypothesis goes off track. Many do the same thing, saying "God is not the author of confusion." Which is simply an emotional response resulting in error and misunderstanding.

However, in the greater reality of God it is He in fact that created confusion:

"Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another’s speech” (Genesis 11:7).​

The character of God demands we understand that what appears to be a contradiction between "not the author of confusion" and "let Us go down there and confuse" is merely an "apparent" contradiction - not an actual contradiction:

The "confusion" He does not author refers to that which robs Him of order - the "confusion of languages" at the Tower of Babel didn't rob Him of order - it restored order.

Which is "restraint" made manifest--that "flaming sword" of fire...until "He is taken out of the way" just before the end.

As for what has been revealed by His servants the prophets, those have been breadcrumbs "precept upon precept, Line upon line, line upon line, Here a little, there a little" (Isaiah 28:13).

No, the context demands that the "restrainer" Paul spoke of specifically was preventing the rise of the Man of Sin, which the ECFs that had anything to say on this subject said with remarkable unanimity that this "restrainer" was PAGAN ROME - sentiments held by them based not on interpretation or conjecture or opinion...but on the prevailing teachings circulating the early church.

 

[ScottA]

The character of God demands we understand that what appears to be a contradiction between "not the author of confusion" and "let Us go down there and confuse" is merely an "apparent" contradiction - not an actual contradiction:

The "confusion" He does not author refers to that which robs Him of order - the "confusion of languages" at the Tower of Babel didn't rob Him of order - it restored order.

No, the context demands that the "restrainer" Paul spoke of specifically was preventing the rise of the Man of Sin, which the ECFs that had anything to say on this subject said with remarkable unanimity that this "restrainer" was PAGAN ROME - sentiments held by them based not on interpretation or conjecture or opinion...but on the prevailing teachings circulating the early church.

Look, you can take warning and realize that what was taught was tainted by the foretold "lie" resulting in "strong delusion" "already at work" 2,000 years ago, or not.

Meanwhile, I am telling you that what was foretold is true, as is your misinterpretation of it, and the arguments against will not stand.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

It's easy to mock as you have.

Even so, I have been most reasonable in explaining that if there is any restraint--because God is in control, it is therefore God who restrains.

Which ought to change most interpretations.

Okay, now that is more clear as to what point you were making. I agree with that point.