-
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!
Ribera’s commentary on the book of Revelation
- Thread starter Apocalypser
- Start date
Why two threads?
David Lamb
Well-Known Member
No, nor am I likely to do so, as I followed your link and find that Francisco Ribera is a Jesuit.
It is meant to expose the false Jesuit teachings of dispensationalism.
Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices. 2 Corinthians 2:11
"...The Jesuit Francisco Ribera's Commentary on the Apocalypse of St. John introduced a new end-times interpretation of Revelation during the Counter-Reformation. This writing reveals itself to be the original source of Futurism, exposing Rome as the author of Dispensationalism...."
I haven't read it, but it may be worth a look. As far as him being a Jesuit, that doesn't automatically discredit everything he might write. I am certainly not a futurist but I get a lot of helpful material from them.
It's odd, I've had Dispys argue that Preterism is a Jesuit construct.
Years ago I did the same. Folks often lazily conjure up convenient bogeymen to simplify the opposition. Preterism has been cast as gnosticism and at other times as Jesuitry. But G and J are miles apart.
It always take extra effort to actually frame the opponent's belief. This is where Preterists have the advantage, because many of us have spent years in the system we now oppose.
Dispensationalism is not a Jesuit teaching. This false claim has been debunked in various ways. I am away from my extensive library on the theology right now, or I would give particulars and quotes. I will say that I recently read a biography of J. N. Darby that did not mention Catholicism a single time.
Actually, since almost all Christians were futurists in the first three centuries, it is a mistake to call some Jesuit book to be "the original source of Futurism." And there have been futurists outside of Rome for centuries.
Are you claiming that dispensational theology is Satanic? If so, you are attacking a huge percentage of evangelicals, in particular Baptists, of teaching Satanic doctrine. This includes me, since I teach Dispensational Theology in our Bible college, went to Japan for 33 years under a dispensational mission board, etc.
If dispensationalism is of Satan, how do you explain our church, which has a very active evangelism program, giving the Gospel to thousands in our area, and has sent out many missionaries around the world. We support many other missionaries we didn't train. There are currently five of my former students out on deputation to go to the Far East, Africa, and other fields. Our church has a full time missions pastor who has been to dozens of countries preaching Christ. Can your non-dispensational church match these efforts?
Let's do a quick comparison:
Jesuit: Has two sources of authority, the Bible and Catholic tradition.
Dispensationalist: Believes in the Bible as the sole authority in theology.
Jesuit: Interprets the Bible by Catholic tradition.
Dispensationalist: Interprets the Bible with a grammatical-historical method.
Jesuit: Has a theology that glorifies the Catholic religion.
Dispensationalist: Dispensational theology has a doxological basis, believing that all of human history is to glorify God.
Jesuit: Is allowed to lie to further Jesuit and thus Catholic purposes.
Dispensationalist: Believes the Bible teaches never to lie.
Jesuit: Believes in baptizing babies for their salvation.
Dispensationalist: Believes there is only one way of salvation, and it is only by the grace of God through faith, "not of works which we have done."
Jesuit: Has a syncretistic method of evangelism, wherein the target culture is allowed to keep their traditions as long as they stick a Catholic name on them.
Dispensationalist: Evangelizes by giving the true Gospel and discipling converts according to the Word of God.
I'll be waiting for a response.
Jesuit: Has two sources of authority, the Bible and Catholic tradition.
Dispensationalist: Believes in the Bible as the sole authority in theology.
Jesuit: Interprets the Bible by Catholic tradition.
Dispensationalist: Interprets the Bible with a grammatical-historical method.
Jesuit: Has a theology that glorifies the Catholic religion.
Dispensationalist: Dispensational theology has a doxological basis, believing that all of human history is to glorify God.
Jesuit: Is allowed to lie to further Jesuit and thus Catholic purposes.
Dispensationalist: Believes the Bible teaches never to lie.
Jesuit: Believes in baptizing babies for their salvation.
Dispensationalist: Believes there is only one way of salvation, and it is only by the grace of God through faith, "not of works which we have done."
Jesuit: Has a syncretistic method of evangelism, wherein the target culture is allowed to keep their traditions as long as they stick a Catholic name on them.
Dispensationalist: Evangelizes by giving the true Gospel and discipling converts according to the Word of God.
I'll be waiting for a response.
I tracked down where the calumny came from that dispensationalism came from Ribera. That's real hard to do because it's all over the Internet with no source ever given! Here's what happened.
A man named Samuel Roffey Maitland was the librarian of the Bishop of Canterbury. Maitland had been influenced by Ribera, and he and Darby briefly met and discussed prophecy. This was long before Darby developed dispensational theology. (This is from Cory Marsh and James Fabio, Discovering Dispensationalism, p. 210, footnote 12. The book is an excellent source on the development of the doctrine.) So Darby never met Rivera, and there is no evidence he was influenced at all by Ribera just because he talked with a man who was influenced thus long before he developed his theology.
Furthermore, if one accepts Wikipedia (Francisco Ribera - Wikipedia), Ribera didn't even believe in a millennium. That's right, Ribera was an amillennialist!! He believed there was going to be a rapture, then a 3 1/2 year tribulation, then Jesus would come and not set up his kingdom, but begin eternity.
A man named Samuel Roffey Maitland was the librarian of the Bishop of Canterbury. Maitland had been influenced by Ribera, and he and Darby briefly met and discussed prophecy. This was long before Darby developed dispensational theology. (This is from Cory Marsh and James Fabio, Discovering Dispensationalism, p. 210, footnote 12. The book is an excellent source on the development of the doctrine.) So Darby never met Rivera, and there is no evidence he was influenced at all by Ribera just because he talked with a man who was influenced thus long before he developed his theology.
Furthermore, if one accepts Wikipedia (Francisco Ribera - Wikipedia), Ribera didn't even believe in a millennium. That's right, Ribera was an amillennialist!! He believed there was going to be a rapture, then a 3 1/2 year tribulation, then Jesus would come and not set up his kingdom, but begin eternity.