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

[Phoneman777]

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.

No, friend, I do believe I get it full well:

Question: What is 2 Thessalonians 2:1-10 KJV dealing with?

Answer: Confused Christians believing the Second Coming was imminent and why that was not the case: the necessity of the rise of the Man of Sin, which Paul had previously told them was being held in check by the "restrainer" but once out of the way, the Man of Sin would arise. Anyone willing to set aside Jesuit eschatological nonsense and simply ask the ECFs what the early church was teaching about the identity of this Restrainer will discover Pagan Rome was preventing the rise of the papal "Man of Sin".

Will most do that? No, they are content to follow satanic Jesuit doctrines authored by papists who have no business commenting on the meat of eschatology when they have for over 1500 years failed to grasp the most basic milk doctrine that even a little

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.

Which of the following is more likely to have happened:

1. The early church suffered "spiritual amnesia" and traded "Pagan Rome" for "Holy Spirit" as the Restrainer.
2. The early church suffered no such ailment and continued repeating what Paul told them for posterity.

See? The lengths to which Jesuit Futurism goes in order to establish itself is exemplified here.

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

There was no foretelling of Jesuit Futurism, only Jesuits who twisted Scripture and somehow managed to convince the very people the Jesuit Counter-Reformation set out to destroy - namely NON-CATHOLICS LIKE YOU - that the means by which they intended to accomplish this destruction - Jesuit Futurism - is Biblical...and how they line up for their ladle of Jesuit Koolaid.

 

[Spiritual Israelite]

No, friend, I do believe I get it full well:

Well, of course you do, friend. We all think that about ourselves, don't we.

Question: What is 2 Thessalonians 2:1-10 KJV dealing with?

Answer: Confused Christians believing the Second Coming was imminent and why that was not the case: the necessity of the rise of the Man of Sin, which Paul had previously told them was being held in check by the "restrainer" but once out of the way, the Man of Sin would arise. Anyone willing to set aside Jesuit eschatological nonsense and simply ask the ECFs what the early church was teaching about the identity of this Restrainer will discover Pagan Rome was preventing the rise of the papal "Man of Sin".

Ah, yes. The ECFs. They all agreed on everything when it came to eschatology, yes? No, they did not. I believe few, if any, of them shared your SDA view of Revelation 20, for example. So, you are only talking about certain ECFs here and not all of them by any means. You have chosen to agree those particular ECFs. I don't. Referencing them proves nothing in this discussion. Absolutely nothing.

Will most do that? No, they are content to follow satanic Jesuit doctrines authored by papists who have no business commenting on the meat of eschatology when they have for over 1500 years failed to grasp the most basic milk doctrine that even a little

You, like them, are following the teachings of fallible men rather than just sticking to scripture like you should. Are you studying the scriptures for yourself like the Bereans to see if what whatever ECFs you're referring to said is true?

Which of the following is more likely to have happened:

1. The early church suffered "spiritual amnesia" and traded "Pagan Rome" for "Holy Spirit" as the Restrainer.

Why do you act as if the early church members were all in agreement on these things? That's just silly. They disagreed on these things just like we still do today.

2. The early church suffered no such ailment and continued repeating what Paul told them for posterity.

False teaching entered the church early on. Why do you act as if that was not the case? Paul said so himself.

See? The lengths to which Jesuit Futurism goes in order to establish itself is exemplified here.

Friend, I do not believe what I do because of the ludicrous belief system of Jesuit Futurism. So, don't talk to me as if I am one of them as I most definitely am not.

There was no foretelling of Jesuit Futurism, only Jesuits who twisted Scripture and somehow managed to convince the very people the Jesuit Counter-Reformation set out to destroy - namely NON-CATHOLICS LIKE YOU - that the means by which they intended to accomplish this destruction - Jesuit Futurism - is Biblical...and how they line up for their ladle of Jesuit Koolaid.

LOL. You are so dramatic. Your drama does nothing to convince me that you are right about this.


Edit: I just now noticed that only the first quote you responded to was mine and the other 2 were from ScottA. Can you please not include quotes from more than one person in the same post?

 

[ScottA]

1. The early church suffered "spiritual amnesia" and traded "Pagan Rome" for "Holy Spirit" as the Restrainer.
2. The early church suffered no such ailment and continued repeating what Paul told them for posterity.

Neither. That is not the cause, but perhaps a symptom. The "lie" that was believed set everything off. So, yes there were and still are all kinds of rabbit holes and trails that the church has veered into. But none of those are the root cause.

There was no foretelling of Jesuit Futurism, only Jesuits who twisted Scripture and somehow managed to convince the very people the Jesuit Counter-Reformation set out to destroy - namely NON-CATHOLICS LIKE YOU - that the means by which they intended to accomplish this destruction - Jesuit Futurism - is Biblical...and how they line up for their ladle of Jesuit Koolaid.

Same problem, but not the root cause.

 

[Douggg]

There was no foretelling of Jesuit Futurism, only Jesuits who twisted Scripture and somehow managed to convince the very people the Jesuit Counter-Reformation set out to destroy - namely NON-CATHOLICS LIKE YOU - that the means by which they intended to accomplish this destruction - Jesuit Futurism - is Biblical...and how they line up for their ladle of Jesuit Koolaid.

SDA created strawman "Jesuit Futurism" is promoted by SDA proponents, but has no bearing on reality.

Futurism is an eschatological view that most of the end-times prophecies in the bible are still unfulfilled.

 

[Phoneman777]

Ah, yes. The ECFs. They all agreed on everything when it came to eschatology, yes?

A specifically identified Restrainer is one thing and an obscure, symbolic "lion" or "bear" is another altogether. Every ECF that had anything to say about the Restrainer all said it was Pagan Rome. England's "greatest prophecy teacher" H. Grattan Guinness calls it "remarkable unanimity".

Early Church Fathers Were Historicist – H. Grattan Guinness

I continually hear that the early church fathers were all futurists with only vague references, there is nothing vague in what our author reveals here: .1. The Fathers interpreted the four wild bea…

nicklasarthur.wordpress.com

You, like them, are following the teachings of fallible men rather than just sticking to scripture like you should. Are you studying the scriptures for yourself like the Bereans to see if what whatever ECFs you're referring to said is true?

You - like all who wait for a future antichrist to arise just before Jesus sneaks into town and sneaks out with the saints or just before the Second Coming - are following Jesuit lies scooped from "the Roman dunghill of decretals".

Why do you act as if the early church members were all in agreement on these things? That's just silly. They disagreed on these things just like we still do today. False teaching entered the church early on. Why do you act as if that was not the case? Paul said so himself.

Why do you act as if everything not mentioned in the Bible is false teaching?
Did Paul say "reject all prophesyings" or did he say "despise not prophesyings...prove all things"?
The evidence points to - not away from - Paul telling the early church the Restrainer was Pagan Rome.

Friend, I do not believe what I do because of the ludicrous belief system of Jesuit Futurism. So, don't talk to me as if I am one of them as I most definitely am not.

If one says antichrist arose in the 1st century and all prophecy has been fulfilled, he is a Jesuit Preterist.
If one says antichrist will arise just before the Second Coming, he is a Jesuit Futurist.
If one says the papal antichrist arose in the 6th century, he's a Protestant Historicist bearer of truth.

What say you?

LOL. You are so dramatic. Your drama does nothing to convince me that you are right about this.

You spelled "emphatic" wrong. I have to be when dealing with people so blinded by Jesuit Futurism that if they tripped over the truth, they'd curse it while picking themselves up and continuing on in search of it.

Edit: I just now noticed that only the first quote you responded to was mine and the other 2 were from ScottA. Can you please not include quotes from more than one person in the same post?

That was unintentional - sometimes happens when a previous reply to a different post is started but not finished.

 

[Phoneman777]

Neither. That is not the cause, but perhaps a symptom. The "lie" that was believed set everything off. So, yes there were and still are all kinds of rabbit holes and trails that the church has veered into. But none of those are the root cause.

Sorry, but not getting your point. Are you saying the early church was told the Holy Spirit was the Restrainer but was deceived into thinking it was Pagan Rome? If so, what evidence is there for that?

 

[Phoneman777]

SDA created strawman "Jesuit Futurism" is promoted by SDA proponents, but has no bearing on reality

Futurism is an eschatological view that most of the end-times prophecies in the bible are still unfulfilled.

Long before there was an SDA, Protestants universally taught Futurism and Preterism were Jesuit lies.

If you're going to defend Jesuit Futurism and oppose Protestant Historicism, at least get somewhat acquainted with Historicism, church history, the Reformation...y'know, something other than Jesuit lies, friend.

 

[ScottA]

Sorry, but not getting your point. Are you saying the early church was told the Holy Spirit was the Restrainer but was deceived into thinking it was Pagan Rome? If so, what evidence is there for that?

No, I am saying that there is one truth and one true cause resulting in a multitude of issues experienced by the church, including this one you seem fixated on involving Rome or the Jesuits. As such, being all symptoms and not the actual cause, you too could spend millennia concerning yourself with the wrong things.

The root cause of all such issues, was the "lie" referred to by Paul that would be the cause of all the alternative issues creating a form of "strong delusion" as to what the real issue is. Meaning, that the first step in coming back to the actual source of all such issues, is to recognize and acknowledge that these issues fulfill the foretold prophecies and warnings for what was already at work from the start of the church, according to the biblical record.

The core issue and root cause then of all such issues and distractions away from the root cause, is the "lie" that was propagated by the "false teachers" Peter spoke of. Who being men of flesh and blood, not seeing the "soon" return of Christ in flesh and blood, began to imagine their own false doctrine of His coming later rather than "soon." From that core "lie" believed, all manner of issues has plagued the church--misinterpretations, further false teachings, and divisions. As a result, the church in every sect have built their doctrines on a foundation of lies. Regardless of their differences, all have come to agree on a not "soon", but future return of Christ--ironically, in that same body of flesh and blood body He gave away--to the church. Which was and is an act of rejection, by the spirit of anti-Christ.

All of which was foretold and is written.

 

[Douggg]

The root cause of all such issues, was the "lie" referred to by Paul that would be the cause of all the alternative issues creating a form of "strong delusion" as to what the real issue is

If you are referring to 2Thessalonians2:11...

11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

.... the strong delusion is that God will bring the slain revealed man of sin back to life. That they who initially believe his claim of having achieved God-hood will be deluded to think it is actually true. The lie, of course, is the revealed man of sin's claim of having achieved God-hood, 2Thessalonians 2:4.

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.

 

[Douggg]

If you're going to defend Jesuit Futurism and oppose Protestant Historicism, at least get somewhat acquainted with Historicism, church history, the Reformation...y'know, something other than Jesuit lies, friend.

I reject that the eschatology view called Futurism is what is being called "Jesuit Futurisim" by you.

The Pope/papacy is not the Antichrist, nor the beast. Get over it. The reformers, and later SDA, made a mistake. The popes of the days of the inquisition were evil, but were not the Antichrist.

If one says the papal antichrist arose in the 6th century, he's a Protestant Historicist bearer of truth.

What say you?

Jesus was the Christ, the promised King of Israel messiah. But the Jews rejected Jesus as such. "King of the Jews" was nailed to the cross, as directed by Pilate.

The Antichrist is will another Jew that the Jews for a while will mistakenly think he is their promised King of Israel messiah. The pope does not qualify.

 

[covenantee]

The Pope/papacy is not the Antichrist, nor the beast. Get over it. The reformers, and later SDA, made a mistake. The popes of the days of the inquisition were evil, but were not the Antichrist.

Exactly what Jesuit futurism wants you to believe.

It rejoices over every deceived willing accomplice.

Whom to believe?

1. The Reformers, whom God raised up to liberate His True Church from spiritual darkness and oppression.
2. Deniers

Who needs a hint?

If the Reformers made a mistake, then God made a mistake in raising them up.

But neither He nor they made a mistake.

 

[ScottA]

If you are referring to 2Thessalonians2:11...

11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

.... the strong delusion is that God will bring the slain revealed man of sin back to life. That they who initially believe his claim of having achieved God-hood will be deluded to think it is actually true. The lie, of course, is the revealed man of sin's claim of having achieved God-hood, 2Thessalonians 2:4.

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.

I was, but no...that's not the "lie"...and I was not asking.

 

[Douggg]

I was, but no...that's not the "lie"...and I was not asking.

You think the revealed man of sin's claim to have achieved God-hood to be the truth ?

 

[ScottA]

You think the revealed man of sin's claim to have achieved God-hood to be the truth ?

If I understand you correctly, yes. I not just "believe", but know what Paul said is true.

 

[Douggg]

If I understand you correctly, yes. I not just "believe", but know what Paul said is true.

The revealed man of sin, in no way, will achieve God-hood. He may claim to have, but it will be a big lie.



In Ezekiel 28 is God's reaction to the revealed man of sin's claim. God has him assassinated, verse 7. The person is code named in verse 2 as the prince of Tyrus.

Ezekiel 28: 2 Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God:

3 Behold, thou art wiser than Daniel; there is no secret that they can hide from thee:

4 With thy wisdom and with thine understanding thou hast gotten thee riches, and hast gotten gold and silver into thy treasures:

5 By thy great wisdom and by thy traffick hast thou increased thy riches, and thine heart is lifted up because of thy riches:

6 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thou hast set thine heart as the heart of God;

7 Behold, therefore I will bring strangers upon thee, the terrible of the nations: and they shall draw their swords against the beauty of thy wisdom, and they shall defile thy brightness.

8 They shall bring thee down to the pit, and thou shalt die the deaths of them that are slain in the midst of the seas.

9 Wilt thou yet say before him that slayeth thee, I am God? but thou shalt be a man, and no God, in the hand of him that slayeth thee.

 

[ScottA]

The revealed man of sin, in no way, will achieve God-hood. He may claim to have, but it will be a big lie.



In Ezekiel 28 is God's reaction to the revealed man of sin's claim. God has him assassinated, verse 7. The person is code named in verse 2 as the prince of Tyrus.

Ezekiel 28: 2 Son of man, say unto the prince of Tyrus, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thine heart is lifted up, and thou hast said, I am a God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seas; yet thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thine heart as the heart of God:

3 Behold, thou art wiser than Daniel; there is no secret that they can hide from thee:

4 With thy wisdom and with thine understanding thou hast gotten thee riches, and hast gotten gold and silver into thy treasures:

5 By thy great wisdom and by thy traffick hast thou increased thy riches, and thine heart is lifted up because of thy riches:

6 Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Because thou hast set thine heart as the heart of God;

7 Behold, therefore I will bring strangers upon thee, the terrible of the nations: and they shall draw their swords against the beauty of thy wisdom, and they shall defile thy brightness.

8 They shall bring thee down to the pit, and thou shalt die the deaths of them that are slain in the midst of the seas.

9 Wilt thou yet say before him that slayeth thee, I am God? but thou shalt be a man, and no God, in the hand of him that slayeth thee.

That certainly qualifies to be called a big lie. However, that is not the lie Paul was referring to.

The man of sin being revealed is not the lie, but is only a prelude to the lie he was referring to, which would come after. That man of sin revealed was portrayed by all who are in Christ being revealed on the cross, where all sin was put to death.

What came after (that Paul was referring to) was the lie that was propagated after the cross, against what Jesus had said of His return...which was to be "of the spirit", "soon", individually at the time of His "knocking", referring also to all that "must shortly come to pass." To the contrary, false teachers foretold by Peter began to believe and teach the now current and most common doctrine of a one-time, flesh return of Christ...someday in the future. Which has been kicked down the road and believed ever since.

 

[Douggg]

The man of sin being revealed is not the lie, but is only a prelude to the lie he was referring to, which would come after. That man of sin revealed was portrayed by all who are in Christ being revealed on the cross, where all sin was put to death.

The revealed man of sin, who will claim to have achieved God-hood will be the Antichrist person. As the Antichrist, he will initially be thought by the Jews as their long awaited King of Israel messiah.

But when he commits the transgression of desolation action in 2Thesslaonians2:4 of claiming to have achieved God-hood, that will reveal him as being the man of sin, and not the messiah after all.

 

[Douggg]

@ScottA As a matter of general principle, I agree that false teachers within different church groups can lead others within those groups astray on a variety of issues.

I am just saying that you picked the wrong bible passage, those in 2Thessalonians2, to make that point. 2Thesslaonians2 deals with eschatology, events of the end times.

I think you may have also referenced 2Peter2:1 regarding false teachers in the manner your are referring to. Which that verse would support your point.

 

[Douggg]

Whom to believe?

What is written in the bible.

Jesus was the Christ, the promised King of Israel messiah. But the Jews rejected Jesus as such. "King of the Jews" was nailed to the cross, as directed by Pilate.

The Antichrist is will another Jew that the Jews for a while will mistakenly think he is their promised King of Israel messiah. The pope does not qualify.

The reformers did not correctly understand eschatology. The reformers were reacting to the persecution they were receiving for breaking away from the pope's dictatorial rule - by accusing the pope/papacy as the Antichrist.

That the bishop of the church at Rome became powerful to later become the pope does not make the Vatican type of dictatorial rule, at the time of the the reformers, right to persecute them for breaking away. But, equally, the reformers misunderstanding of eschatology also does not make the pope/papacy the Antichrist.

Time to get with what is written in the bible.

 

[Phoneman777]

No, I am saying that there is one truth and one true cause resulting in a multitude of issues experienced by the church, including this one you seem fixated on involving Rome or the Jesuits.

Fixation isn't always bad. Are not Christians fixated on saving souls or saving babies from abortion? I'm fixated on saving people from being seduced by the papal beast and being duped into taking it's "mark of authority".