This is the conspiratorial stuff I said that I find wholly uninteresting. I'm not a Futurist, but Futuristic ideas, as well as Preteristic ideas, are present in the writings of the Fathers. The idea that Jesuits invented them to counter the Reformation is a pretty silly and historically indefensible idea.
-CryptoLutheran
Are you saying that there was no counter-reformation?
Are you saying that there was no Francisco Ribera?
Are you saying that he did not write In sacram beati Ioannis Apostoli and Evangelistae Apocalypsin Commentariip, positing a single futurized Antichrist, in an attempt to invalidate the Reformation declaration and proclamation of the apostasized papacy as antichrist?
Reformers did not consider it "a pretty silly and historically indefensible idea."
Brightman, Thomas. Revelation of the Revelation, that is The Revelation of St. John. Against Bellarmine, the confuting of that counterfaite ANTICHRIST, whom Bellarmine describeth, and laboureth is prouve by arguments with all his might Booke 3. touching the Pope of Rome [p. 622-770] (1615) : MVT : Free Download & Streaming : Internet Archive
Futurists don't consider it "a pretty silly and historically indefensible idea."
Dispensational futurist Clarence Larkin in Dispensational Truth:
"The “Futurist School” interprets the language of the Apocalypse “literally,” except such symbols as are named as such and hold that the whole of the Book, from the end of the third chapter, is yet “future” and unfulfilled, and that the greater part of the Book, from the beginning of chapter six to the end of chapter nineteen, describes what shall come to pass during the last week of “Daniel’s Seventy Weeks.” . . . In its present form it may be said to have originated at the end of the Sixteenth Century, with the Jesuit Ribera, who actuated by the same motive as the Jesuit Alcazar, sought to rid the Papacy of the stigma of being called the “Antichrist,” and so referred the prophecies of the Apocalypse to the distant future. This view was accepted by the Roman Catholic Church and was for a long time confined to it, but, strange to say, it has wonderfully revived since the beginning of the Nineteenth Century, and among Protestants. . . ., The “Futurist” interpretation of scripture is the one employed in this book."
Last edited:
Upvote
0