The Jesuit Origins of Futurism

Now, Dave, if Martin Luther called Pope Leo X by the name of The Anti-Christ, then Martin Luther believed the traditional doctrine of looking for the Blessed Hope long before the lying Jesuits made up their story in order to take the heat off the corrupt Roman Catholicism because the Eastern Orthodox divided with Roman Catholicism in 1054 AD and strike two (to use an American expression) was the Reformation of 1517, the greatest event in European history. So do the math: Luther is at the start of the 16th century and is looking for the Blessed Hope to deliver him from the Anti-Christ and the Jesuits, according to you yourself, were at the end of the 16th century.

And by the way, Martin Luther is reported to have said that several priests came to him when he was in Rome and said that they were not sodomites like most of the priests in Rome but that they had mistresses.

 

The Jesuits said that the Anti-Christ had already been here, thereby aiding the preterists and the 70 AD theory, which you support. Martin Luther said that the Anti-Christ was the Pope.

The British Pentecostals are the authors of the pre-trib rapture.

 

Alcazar invented Preterism. Francisco Ribera was little more than a papal apologist and made up misleading statements that the book of Revelation could not be considered as being in the present, which is nonsense on stilts. I don't even think that Roman Catholics remember Ribera very much because he was off in a corner in Spain. If he represents futurism, then you cannot say that dispensationalism has anything to do with futurism because it does not use Ribera's scheme. Dispensationalism has to do with Darbyism and a study of the various covenants that God used in history. Your author has missed the boat on Scofield and Darby and the Dallas Theological Seminary.

As for what Roman Catholics believe, I can tell you that New Advent has very little on Ribera and does not have an entry of futurism.

 

many of the ECF were premils, were they all Jesuits than? And the official teaching of RCC would be A Mil, correct?

 

Nonsense. The futurist that you are talking about is the obscure Spaniard. Check Alcazar in Wikipedia or use a search engine--he was a preterist and he was lying to cover up for the evil Pope Leo X. It is Ribera who came up with the crazy time scheme--probably some more Jesuit propaganda. It is perfectly correct to wonder if the Mayor of London or the head of the Labour Party is not the Anti-Christ and no one needs a Jesuit timetable to make that assertion as everyone is always speculating who the Anti-Christ would be if he was alive right now.

So all of this Jesuit stuff has nothing to do with dispensationalism, which came from Darby, a Pentecostal, and Scofield, a Baptist I think. I doubt if either one of them paid any attention to Jesuit propaganda. Neither Alcazar nor Ribera are respectable theologians.

 

Scofield was a Congregationalist, but most of his teachings would indeed fit in many Baptist churches!
I do not think either him nor Darby even read the guy you mentioned, and I know those ECF that were premil did not!

 

Where did those ECF get their views from though?

 

Thanks! I never knew much about Scofield. I don't disagree with Dispensationalism except for the Darby stuff that the Brits stuffed into the doctrine.

 

Which would be?

 

Some teenage girl said that the rapture would occur before the tribulation when she had a word of knowledge or something like that at a Pentecostal service where Darby was--not sure how Darby relates to the teenage girl.

 

Was Darby into Charasmatic chaos?