FR7 Baptist
Active Member
That's a heretical view of eschatology.
-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Baptist Eschatology
- Thread starter Bill Brown
- Start date
That's a heretical view of eschatology.
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
Catholics believe in the future Second Coming of Christ.
I'm a Baptist who is also a heretical Preterist. Taking Christ at His word led me into "heresy" I guess.
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
Partial Preterism is one thing, and I'm quite open to it. Full Preterism is what's heretical because it denies a fundamental doctrine of the faith, to wit: the future physical Second Coming of the Lord Jesus Christ.
You know, it didn't used to be a fundamental. The original series of books (1910) on which the term is based did not include it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalism
But later it was indeed made part of the Shibboleth. But none of this matters seeing that Scripture is what we base our beliefs on.
FR7 Baptist
Active Member
While I do affirm the Five Fundamentals, I'm not a "fundamentalist" in the modern context of that word, but rather a harmless, non-threatning conservative evangelical. Also, I wasn't using the term "fundamental doctrine" in reference to the Five Fundamentals. I meant things that have been universally defined as fundamental to the Christian religion, like the Trinity.
I affirm the Five Fundamentals too. I am sure you are well-meaning but you are not "harmless" since you, in effect, cast me as a heretic.
Oh well. Have a good evening.
There is a difference between Catholic preterism established after the prostant reformation and the preterism established prior to that time.
Catholics established theirs in response to Historicsm which saw the Pope as the antichrist. The Geneva bible study notes called him that. Catholics established theirs as a defensive measure to deflect charges leveled against them by the protestant leaders.
The preterism that I am a member of (I'm also a Southern Baptist) dates back to the Apostles who expected Christ to return in their time. The older belief in preterism is simply based on being guided by the Holy Spirit and teachings of Christ and the Apostles. And if Christ and the Apostles espouse it then its where I need to be. Nough said.
Catholics established theirs in response to Historicsm which saw the Pope as the antichrist. The Geneva bible study notes called him that. Catholics established theirs as a defensive measure to deflect charges leveled against them by the protestant leaders.
The preterism that I am a member of (I'm also a Southern Baptist) dates back to the Apostles who expected Christ to return in their time. The older belief in preterism is simply based on being guided by the Holy Spirit and teachings of Christ and the Apostles. And if Christ and the Apostles espouse it then its where I need to be. Nough said.
There is a difference between always being in expectation of Christ and trying to suggest His second coming was at the destruction of Jerusalem. Jesus told His disciples to be always watching. We are instructed to do the same. Jesus also told them that no man knows the hour of His return and the end of the world.
The term "fundamentals" (as in the noun) is what was being discussed. That term was based on the publication in 1910. Yes, I know, you can scour the internet and find some good Christian using the word "fundamental" in a different way. It takes nothing away from my original assertion.
Two points for you. Enjoy them.
BTW, have you carefully read what you quoted? Those things that Spurgeon labels as "fundamental truths" are all indeed fundamental truths (though he left some essentials out). He erred IMO in what he added in the last sentence.
Last edited by a moderator:
brucebaptist
New Member
catholics also believe:
mary is the redeemer and salvation of ALL of mankind...
that they (catholics) literally become Christ...
and that a cracker literally becomes Christ...
whats your point?
Last edited by a moderator:
Wow, I'm suprised how many others there are here who believe amil, I thought the majority would be premil, pretrib rapture. I'm amil, I do NOT believe in a rapture, never heard of the term until I married baptist, lol. My husband firmly believes in a pretrib premil rapture. We NEVER discuss eschatology, LOL.
So, Baptist eschatology is like the proverbial "box of chocolates".
Tom: Don't be concerned brother, everyone here at the BB is a heretic in the eyes of another.
SBCJen: Welcome to the BB.
For all: The term "rapture" is taken from
caught up: (Rapture)
In the orginal language of the NT Bible - koine Greek, the word for "caught up" is harpazo or (From Strong's) 726
There is much more in between but IMO, these are the milestones.
Tom: Don't be concerned brother, everyone here at the BB is a heretic in the eyes of another.
SBCJen: Welcome to the BB.
For all: The term "rapture" is taken from
1 Thessalonians 4:17 Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord.
caught up: (Rapture)
In the orginal language of the NT Bible - koine Greek, the word for "caught up" is harpazo or (From Strong's) 726
1) to seize, carry off by force
2) to seize on, claim for one's self eagerly
3) to snatch out or away
2) to seize on, claim for one's self eagerly
3) to snatch out or away
The reason the word "rapture" is popularly used is because it is taken from the Latin Vulgate word for "harpazo" which has the root "rapturo, rapiero".
Presumably because the modern use of the word came through a Catholic priest named Manuel Lacunza (1731-1801) who used the Vulgate exclusively.
He posed as a converted Jew named Juan Josafat Ben Ezra and wrote a book in Spanish: The Coming of the Messiah in Glory and Majesty. Ten years after his death it was published in 1811.
The book was translated into English by Edward Irving in 1827; later, elements of the book were taught by Nelson Darby (1800-1882).
The doctrine was picked up and popularized by a young girl Margaret MacDonald/Nelson Darby (Margaret purportedly, was given to visions).
Christ's return was viewed as two-staged. One secretly to "rapture" (snatch away) the elect and seven years later to return to execute the wrath of God upon the world and then set up the millenial kingdom to fulfill the promises to Israel, restore the kingdom to Israel and physically sit upon the Throne of David as the head of the Gentile nations for 1000 years after which the New Jerusalem is ushered in (the eternal state).
Later CI Scofield published the Scofield Reference Bible in 1967 containing copious notes concerning dispensationalism and the rapture.
There is much more in between but IMO, these are the milestones.
HankD
Last edited:
HankD I think you have done a fine job of summarizing these milestones - I would add that they are milestones of tragedy in Baptist Doctrine/Eschatology for all the perversions of truth and purpose. Much more harm than good has come from them.
This business of "watching" gets misinterpreted nowadays into "watching for signs" or for events. The actual meaning of the concept is that we to be watching ourselves, constantly taking our own spiritual inventory. For those interested, I did a study on this very topic:
http://asterisktom.xanga.com/730108752/watching-for-what/
No, the actual meaning is we are to be watching for His second coming, for we know not when He will come. Not watching for signs, watching for Him.