Historicist Books

[Apollos]

I'm still figuring out my views, but here are the standard historicist books:

http://protestanteschatology.weebly.com/books.html

[steve7150]

I'm still figuring out my views, but here are the standard historicist books:








I have the historicist view although i think it was written around 66AD. It's hard for me to conceive that the entire book is about a brief period of time whether by the preterist or futurist view. There could be several beasts or Anti-Christs over the church age like Nero and the Papacy and another one for this period.

[Apollos]

I think the historicist view has been overlooked in recent times - I would like to give it a thorough look at. Some historicists have dated Revelation early - i.e. Isaac Newton, Francis Nigel Lee. What are your reasons for dating Revelation early?

[steve7150]

I think the historicist view has been overlooked in recent times - I would like to give it a thorough look at. Some historicists have dated Revelation early - i.e. Isaac Newton, Francis Nigel Lee. What are your reasons for dating Revelation early?Apollos





In Kenneth Gentry's book "The beast of Revelation" he gives many reasons , here are two, one internal and one external.

He claims in Rev 11.1 John's measuring of the temple for it's preservation requires it be intact or it does'nt make sense. It speaks of the temple in the present tense never suggesting it will be rebuilt as Ezekial did in his measurements.
The external reason is that the Muratorian canon from between 170-200AD says "the blessed Apostle Paul following the rule of his predecessor John, writes to no more then 7 churches by name and John too indeed in the Apocalypse , although he writes to 7 churches , yet addresses all.

This writer claims that John wrote to the churches before Paul yet Paul died around 68AD.

[steve]

Apollos,

Thanks so much for posting these resources. I wish I had had this link when I was writing my book! It was so difficult to find works currently in print that present the historicist view. Everyone cited Elliott's and Guinness' works, but I was totally unable to get my hands on a copy of either.

[selah]

I was invited to a friends house tonight. There was a man there teaching about the Seventh Day Adventist view of end times. He listed some of the 14 rules that William Miller put together in 1844 to be used as guides for understanding prophesy. (I didn't know they had 14 (more) rules.)

When the man mentioned rule #5, historicism, I remembered that I think Steve Gregg said, correct me if I'm wrong, that SDAs are historicists. Is this "rule" of such importance that the whole SDA end-time viewpoint gets called historicist? Why is it not dispensational? Are these two similar?

Maybe there are two applications of the word "historicist." Maybe it IS of such importance to SDA eschatology that the whole viewpoint gets labeled as such, AND maybe it also just happens to be one of their "rules for understanding prophesy." Am I correct about this?

The man taught that historicism means "past, present, and future," that prophesy has a past, present, and future meaning. Can anyone think of an example of this? I keep thinking of a couple of verses, but they just don't seem to fit. (While the man was teaching, I digressed and thought, " I wonder what he would say to Steve Gregg's even-handed approach to Daniel and Revelation."

I've got this growing desire....I'm just going to have to buy "Revelation: Four Views." Is the historicist viewpoint, or more specifically, is the SDA point of view represented in the book? I want to compare the SDA viewpoint with the other POVs, but would like to learn it from the calm even-handed approach that I have heard Steve Gregg's book takes.

Thanks,
Selah*

[steve7150]

When the man mentioned rule #5, historicism, I remembered that I think Steve Gregg said, correct me if I'm wrong, that SDAs are historicists. Is this "rule" of such importance that the whole SDA end-time viewpoint gets called historicist? Why is it not dispensational? Are these two similar?


Hi Selah,

Yes the SDA and JW view is historicist meaning it covers the church age or the time between Christ's first and second coming. The difference between the two is the JWs believe in a 1,000 year milleneum on earth and the SDAs believe the milleneum is up in heaven for believers and unbelievers are just simply dead, period and the devil just roams the earth for this period, if i remember correctly. BTW in both the SDA and JW view the RCC is the beast throughout, i believe.
The dispensational view is different in that it squeezes almost everything in Rev into a final 7 year period , with a terrible tribulation in the last 3 1/2 year period. The preterist view puts this period at Jerusalem 70AD and sqeezes all of Rev into it.
Both the SDA and JW view believe Rev was written around 95AD , but i think the preterists are right about the fact it was written around 66AD and the first few chapters are about Jerusalem's destruction but then it moves on to the rest of the church age IMO.

[selah]

Hi Selah,

Yes the SDA and JW view is historicist meaning it covers the church age or the time between Christ's first and second coming.

Hi steve 7150, thank you for writing.

Would the historic view include the alleged pre-creation rebellion resulting in satan and 1/3rd of the angels being cast out of heaven? If it does not, then where does that story fit in with the historic view--if at all? (I'm just sure the SDA believe this story.)

The difference between the two is the JWs believe in a 1,000 year milleneum on earth and the SDAs believe the milleneum is up in heaven for believers and unbelievers are just simply dead, period and the devil just roams the earth for this period, if i remember correctly. BTW in both the SDA and JW view the RCC is the beast throughout, i believe.

I am surprised to hear that SDA and JW have this (or anything) in common. Upon second thought, I did recently learn that they agree on "soul sleep," although in all my years around SDA believers, I've never heard them call it by this phrase.

Yes, I think you are right. SDA still believe the RCC is the beast, although I heard it clearly stated last night that it is the organization, NOT the individual. In fact, the speaker alluded to the idea that Ellen G. White (the SDA prophetess) wrote that more people will be saved from the RCC church than from the SDA church! Wow, can you believe that? I have to double check that because the speaker seemed illusive. He did not say EGW's name; he only seemed to reference her by demographics.

The dispensational view is different in that it squeezes almost everything in Rev into a final 7 year period , with a terrible tribulation in the last 3 1/2 year period.

Thanks for clarifying this; I have been misinformed until now. So this would be the "camp" from which the "Left Behind" series came from....?

The preterist view puts this period at Jerusalem 70AD and sqeezes all of Rev into it.
Both the SDA and JW view believe Rev was written around 95AD , but i think the preterists are right about the fact it was written around 66AD and the first few chapters are about Jerusalem's destruction but then it moves on to the rest of the church age IMO.

So...if one could convincingly defend the 95AD date for Revelation, then this fact would disqualify the preterists view. When do dispensationalists say the book was written? If I were to guess, I would say "after 70AD" (to exclude the destruction of the temple as a topic the prophesies are about).

Hey, for many years I have wondered why some people seem to go overboard or get carried away (my judgement-call) into Eschatology. Today, I just thought of a verse that might give credense to their reasoning. In Luke 24:25, 26 Jesus corrects Cleopas and his friend for not understanding the OT prophesy, which if they had, their faith may have flourished during Jesus' death. Had they KNOWN that Jesus had to suffer, die and be resurrected, they may have glorified God instead of feel discouraged (verse 21). From Jesus' rebuke (vrs. 25,26) can we deduce that since Jesus at that time, wanted his followers to know the OT prophesy fortelling of his first coming, that He might also want His followers of today to understand OT prophesies (and new testament fulfillments) so we would be faithfilled in the "end times." When we think about how few stood faithful to Jesus in His "time of trouble" (His torture and death), what if a corresponding few will remain faithful in the "end time?" That is not very encouraging, is it?

I think like the Ethiopian spoken of in Acts 8:30, 31 who was asked,"Do you understand?" and the Ethiopian said, "How can I unless someone guides me?"

When I think of "guides," I seek a calm and gentle spirit to speak clearly without pressure or damnation (or extenuating theology). I think I'm going to visit the Eschatology section.
Thanks,
Selah*

[SteveF]

Selah wrote:

When the man mentioned rule #5, historicism, I remembered that I think Steve Gregg said, correct me if I'm wrong, that SDAs are historicists. Is this "rule" of such importance that the whole SDA end-time viewpoint gets called historicist? Why is it not dispensational?

It’s my understanding that when SDA was birthed the dispensational view was not widely known. Dispenstatinalist teaching only began a few years earlier (1830’s) and didn’t reach any real level of popularity until years after SDA was well established. At the time of SDA’s birth the Historist view was the predominant view in Christian circles. Thus, it makes sense that SDA would also approach certain prophetic passages with a historist viewpoint. Of course, the SDA would have their own particular view on certain passages, just like not all Futurists (or dispensationalists) would see all passages the same way.

I am surprised to hear that SDA and JW have this (or anything) in common

They may have more in common than you realize. They are actually distant cousins because they both have their roots in Millerism (William Miller). There are many religious movements (more than 20) whose branches can be traced back to Millerism. The three most recognizable are SDA, JW and The Worldwide Church of God (Herbert W Armstrong).

-Millerism broke into two Groups, Sabbatarian Adventists and Sunday Adventists

-Sabbatarian Aventistism then broke off into two branches, one of which was SDA

-Sunday Aventistism broke off into several branches, one of which was a group that called themselves Independents. It was an offshoot of this group (the Independents) that the Jehovah’s Witnesses were birthed.

[Jess]

Hi Selah,

You wrote...

"I've got this growing desire....I'm just going to have to buy "Revelation: Four Views."

I have a copy. Definitely worth your money.