“THREE GENERAL VIEWS OF PROPHECY: “There are three general views of interpretations of the prophecy of the book of Revelation (some say four). • The Preterist Theory. • The Historical Interpretation • The Futurist Theory. The preterist view places all prophecy in the past and proclaims every prophecy was fulfilled in or prior to the year 70 A.D. They claim that the Second Coming of Yahshua has already happened among all the other foretold events in the Book of Revelation. Most scholars place the writing of the Book of Revelation about 93-96 A.D. Now if John wrote his book in 93 A.D., how could it all be fulfilled by 70 A.D.? The best definition I ever heard of a preterist, is one who was too lazy to study history. In his book, The Rapture Of The Saints, Rev. Duncan McDougall, M.A. explains the origin of the preterist theory: “Alcazar, a Spanish Jesuit, started the idea that the Apostle John could not possibly foretell events which were to happen hundreds of years after his own time; that he was writing merely about what was happening in his own day, and that his Antichrist was probably the Emperor Nero or some other early persecutor. The theory has been adopted by German rationalists, and finds favor with the modernists in the churches today.” The historical interpretation views Revelation as a panoramic view of history from the first century to the Second Coming of Yahshua the Messiah. As the Book of Revelation is written mostly in symbols, the key to understanding properly interpreted symbolism is to connect them with the historical events as they happen. The historical method can be the only true interpretation of the Book of Revelation. The reason the historical interpretation was repudiated is because, once the Bible was printed, it could be clearly seen that the Church of Rome, along with the pope, represented much of the fulfillment of John’s vision. This put the heat on the Church of Rome. To counter this heat, two Spanish Jesuit priests promoted the preterist theory and the futurist theory of Revelation. Alcazar promoted the preterist view and Ribera promoted the futurist view. The one put all prophecy in the past and the other projected all prophecy into the future. Today we have all kinds of preachers and teachers promoting both of these false views, and the people are really eating it up. The futurist view projects all Bible prophecy into the future. They believe in a “rapture”, a future “antichrist”, that the Roman Empire will be reestablished, and either 3½ or 7 years of tribulation (they call it: “Daniel’s 70th week” or “half week”). In his book, The Rapture Of The Saints, Rev. Duncan McDougall, M.A. explains the origin of the futurist view: “Ribera, another Spanish Jesuit, went to the other extreme and propounded the theory that the whole Book of Revelation related to events to take place just at the time of Christ’s Second Coming, and therefore still in the future. The Antichrist was to be a World-Dictator who would appear at the end of this dispensation. ... For 250 years, from 1580 to 1830, the idea of an individual personal Antichrist to appear sometime in the future was the recognized teaching of the Church of Rome.” Now if you are teaching anything other than the historical interpretation, you are carrying water for either Alcazar or Ribera, with the blessing of Rome! The futurists get their 3½ years of tribulation from Daniel 7:25 (They say this is the Antichrist and he will rule for three and a half literal calendar years of tribulation.): “Dan. 7:25 ‘And he shall speak great words against the most High, and wear out the saints of the most High, and think to change times and laws: and they shall be given into his hand until a time and times and the dividing of time’.” At this time, I will return to William V. Fowler’s booklet, End Time Revelation, p.127, and let him explain what this passage is all about:
Posted on: Sun, 14 Sep 2014 11:41:12 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015