Is this the lie that started many false teachings?

With the advent of the printing press in the 15th century, and the resulting explosion of Bibles accessible in the common language from Protestant sources, it became readily apparent to those who could now study the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation in particular, that Bible prophecy identified by symbols a persecuting apostate entity generally known as antichrist.

The Catholic Church was losing its hold on people and protestants were rising.....

Francisco Ribera (1537-1591) was a Jesuit doctor of theology, born in Spain, who began writing a lengthy (500 page) commentary in 1585 on the book of Revelation (Apocalypse) titled In Sacrum Beati Ioannis Apostoli, & Evangelistiae Apocalypsin Commentarij, and published it about the year 1590. He died in 1591 at the age of fifty-four, so he was not able to expand on his work or write any other commentaries. In order to remove the Catholic Church from consideration as the antichrist power, Ribera proposed that the first few chapters of the Apocalypse applied to ancient pagan Rome, and the rest he limited to a yet future period of 3 1/2 literal years, immediately prior to the second coming. During that time, the Roman Catholic Church would have fallen away from the pope into apostasy.
The Jesuit Inspired Futurist Lie Spreads To America's Protestant Seminaries = many false teachings today...

i agree preterism is heresy..

There is nothing new in this world.
Prophecy is prophecy. We can't understand it, so the Bible teaches us not to teach others at will and not to be a teacher, because when you are not qualified to explain prophecy, what you say is the wrong doctrine.

And this was an excellent deduction. A literal 3 1/2 years in the future (42 months in Revelation 13) is exactly half of 7 years, which turns out to be Daniel's 70th week of years!. So why is Francisco Ribera getting a bad rap? He actually did some very good Bible study.

because there was no such thing as Futurism or Preterism until these Jesuits decided to invent them, and they invented them so the condemnation could be taken away from their church. These two invented doctrines have caused so much confusion and division. Historicism was what the unadulterated church believed until these theory's were invented.

I'm asking people to study History and then decide if Futurism is divinely inspired or was inspired by man causing many errors?

I don't like to use heresy to solve the problem of biblical understanding, which can't help us better understand and discuss the Bible. You can't expect a person who has just come into contact with the Bible to understand all the Bible immediately. There will always be strange understandings. People will only take it for granted that their own way of understanding is right, and everything else is heresy. But I think if you measure others as heretic according to the words of the Bible, God will also measure you as heretic. That's why I won't say that others are heretical. I'll just say that there may be something wrong with your understanding of the Bible.

The Preterist School which sees most of the prophecies being fulfilled in the past in the events surrounding the destruction of Jerusalem and the pagan Roman Empire;

The Futurist School which sees most of the prophecies in Revelation – from chapter 4 onward – as applying to events yet future.

The Historicist School which sees the book of Revelation as largely predictive of actual events to occur throughout the history of Christianity from the time of John until the return of Jesus Christ.
The Historicist School contained the viewpoint of almost all Protestant Reformers from the Reformation into the 19th century.

by understanding the past we can be wiser today. By looking back at the heresy we can hopefully avoid making the same mistakes.

True, Jesus is the Key and point of our focus, but God gave use the Bible stories as a witness for today.

Heb 12:1 Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,
Heb 12:2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

I am fortunate that my parents saw fit to teach me the Scriptures and we were never encouraged to use commentaries of men at all.

It does not matter what the motivation might have been. The fact of the matter is that there is a literal 3 1/2 year period in both Daniel and Revelation which is connected to the Antichrist. And since the Antichrist has not has yet taken total control of the world, we can rest assured that it is in the future. So the labels "Futurism" and "Preterism" mean absolutely nothing. It is the reality of whether the Antichrist's prophecy has been fulfilled or not. And it definitely has not been fulfilled. So let's not throw mud at the Jesuits.

I'm fine with throwing mud on Jesuits. They gave us the globe Earth lie. And a whole host of other evils.

Why is preterism heresy? Is it because it doesn't fit the prevailing narrative that IGNORES completely all of the NUMEROUS time statements in the NT? The writer of Hebrews wrote: "In a VERY, VERY little while, He who is coming WILL COME and will NOT delay" (Heb. 10:37). I have yet to find ONE futurist who even attempts to exegete that verse!

The teachings of full preterism are based upon sound exegesis and adherence to the CLEAR timing of things in the NT. Futurism ignores them or twists them because they do not fit its preconceived ideas and preconceptions. Futurism has a false concepts of the NATURE of the Parousia, the Resurrection, and the Judgment and, therefore, it cannot align its doctrines with the timing!!!!!!!

The Second Coming was NOT to be visible or bodily (a false understanding of Acts 1); the Resurrection is NOT the hope of the Church but was the hope of Israel; the Judgement was against THAT known world of Jews which Jesus condemned in Matthew 23.

The Resurrection was the hope of ISRAEL. It was for that hope that Paul was in chains. The Jews did not think of if as bodies popping up out of their graves but of RESTORATION to fellowship with God and of escape from the shackles of SHEOL/HADES. That was all accomplished at Jesus' return in judgment in A.D. 70 when the power of the holy people was completely shattered and SHEOL/HADES were destroyed.

I will now take my leave from this site where people are so insecure in their own positions that they have to falsely throw around the H word. Time will prove that it is NOT the preterist who is misinterpreting but the FUTURIST. Open your minds to what others have to say. You condemn what you do NOT understand and you do it to your own peril. Let God be true and every man a liar (Romans 3:4). Realize that when you malign the teachings of preterism you malign your own Lord because HE Himself taught His SOON return in HIS generation. You are making Him out to be a liar!

Why not give Full Preterists their own area in which to make their case? Most futurists do NOT even understand what we are teaching and yet them condemn because they have been taught to condemn by those who misrepresent us.

ALL prophecies have been fulfilled. Futurists refuse to see it.

"The Preterist School" does NOT see what you purport! You do not understand preterism and yet you condemn it.

When do you believe that the letter to the Hebrews was authored? And can you explain when the words of the Lord to Peter, concerning the apostle John were brought to fulfilment? John 21:20-24

It may speak to your Hebrews 10:37

I think Revelation is future also. I get that just from my knowledge of the rest of the bible such as Daniel, Zech, etc.. and reading the text itself.



I am simple like that. I got saved at 18 in prison with no history of any knowledge about Christianity, church, or the bible. I was a high school drop out, and dumber than a box of rocks. I read Revelation in the KJV in prison after I was born again and filled with the Spirit and I understood it to be future. I had no other books or anyone to talk to about it at that time.

Now since that time I have heard various views and recently I have collected some good books from authors and theologians I respect that promise to explain their views using the rules of hermeneutics and I look forward to seeing who does the best job.

I am open minded. However at this time it is very easy for me to read it as those events that will occur at the day of judgment at "the Revelation of Jesus Christ" and which is still future.

And I don't even know any Jesuits! LOL

The Book of Hebrews was most likely written ca A.D. 64. But even if someone takes the later date of prior to A.D. 96, he must explain when the Lord came in a VERY, VERY little time after that date. Neither date allows for His return as a VERY, VERY little as constituting thousands of years!

I'm not sure I understand what you are getting at with John 21. Jesus is not saying that John would live to see His coming only that it was His prerogative to make that happen.

If we back up to Hebrews 10:25, we find that the writer is addressing those of his day. THEY were not to neglect the gathering of themselves together. Why? THEY were to see THE DAY approaching in their lifetime. From the time that the writer of Hebrews wrote, Jesus was to come in a VERY, VERY little while. It is clear.

Maybe Gospel Preaching and salvations have pushed back the final judgment. Remember Nineveh. Maybe it's not a date on a calendar and God can delay if He chooses. Maybe hardness toward the Gospel is coming and the lack of fruit is about to bring forth the reapers to cut it down and burn it. Maybe revival of repentant souls will push it back a little further. Maybe we should focus on winning souls before it is too late.

Surly it stands to ordinary reason - seeing as Jesus had all power and authority given to Him by the Father - that He could express a prerogative if He wished to do so - but I cannot see that such a grave statement to Peter about John could be dismissed so easily. Did John see Christ come in his life time?

So I've seen Christ face to face and I am LIKE HIM right now? Yeah, no.