BUSTED - 2 false schemes of interpreting the Apocalypse

[Excalibur]

Futurism (Antichrist still to come) - crafted by the Jesuit Ribera in the 16th century. 
 

Preterism (Antichrist was Nero) - crafted by the Jesuit Alcasar in the 17th century. 

[WilliamL]

5 minutes ago, Excalibur said:

Futurism (Antichrist still to come) - crafted by the Jesuit Ribera in the 16th century. 
 

Preterism (Antichrist was Nero) - crafted by the Jesuit Alcasar in the 17th century. 

This is an example of an ad hominem argument.

[Excalibur]

8 minutes ago, WilliamL said:

This is an example of an ad hominem argument.

How do you figure?  
 

I made no argument.  Both of my statements are historically verifiable.  
 

Both schemes were crafted by jesuits to protect the pope from the darts of the Protestants that identified him and his church as fulfillments of prophecy. 
 

Historicism is the only scheme of interpreting the Apocalypse that says the antichrist is presently in our midst. 

Edited Tuesday at 10:38 PM by Excalibur

[WilliamL]

1 minute ago, Excalibur said:

How do you figure?  
 

I made no argument.  Both of my statements are historically verifiable.  
 

Both schemes were crafted by jesuits to protect the pope from the darts of the Protestants that identified him and his church as fulfillments of prophecy. 

Your argument was clearly stated in the subject heading, implied in the first post, and then confirmed in the post above, where you say "Both schemes were crafted by jesuits to protect the pope..." 

So you clearly state that neither 'false crafted scheme' has any theological merit -- without ever actually examining whether or not one or the other might in fact have some merit.

Attack the logic of an argument, not the one who says it: always the better plan. (Ad hominem means "against the man.")

[Michael37]

1 hour ago, Excalibur said:

Futurism (Antichrist still to come) - crafted by the Jesuit Ribera in the 16th century. 
 

Preterism (Antichrist was Nero) - crafted by the Jesuit Alcasar in the 17th century. 

Hi @Excalibur

Here on Worthy Christian Forums there is room for some degree of emotive discussion on a variety of topics, but as WilliamL has rightly pointed out, (unless quoting Scripture),  it is necessary to address the validity of arguments based on their content without bias as to their exponents. 

There are several passages in the Bible that mention the Antichrist and indicate that the spirit of the Antichrist is already present in the world. Here are a few key verses:

• 1 John 2:18 – "Children, it is the last hour; and just as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared. This is how we know it is the last hour."
• 1 John 4:3 – "Every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world."
• 2 John 1:7 – "For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the Antichrist."

These verses suggest that the Antichrist is not just a singular future figure but that there are many who embody the spirit of deception and opposition to Christ.

The cumulative effect of this is depicted in Revelation 13, and foretold in 2 Thessalonians 2.

[Excalibur]

15 hours ago, Michael37 said:

Hi @Excalibur

Here on Worthy Christian Forums there is room for some degree of emotive discussion on a variety of topics, but as WilliamL has rightly pointed out, (unless quoting Scripture),  it is necessary to address the validity of arguments based on their content without bias as to their exponents. 

There are several passages in the Bible that mention the Antichrist and indicate that the spirit of the Antichrist is already present in the world. Here are a few key verses:

• 1 John 2:18 – "Children, it is the last hour; and just as you have heard that the Antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared. This is how we know it is the last hour."
• 1 John 4:3 – "Every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the Antichrist, which you have heard is coming and even now is already in the world."
• 2 John 1:7 – "For many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh. This is the deceiver and the Antichrist."

These verses suggest that the Antichrist is not just a singular future figure but that there are many who embody the spirit of deception and opposition to Christ.

The cumulative effect of this is depicted in Revelation 13, and foretold in 2 Thessalonians 2.

I will keep what you said in mind as I proceed.  
 

[Excalibur]

19 hours ago, WilliamL said:

Your argument was clearly stated in the subject heading, implied in the first post, and then confirmed in the post above, where you say "Both schemes were crafted by jesuits to protect the pope..." 

So you clearly state that neither 'false crafted scheme' has any theological merit -- without ever actually examining whether or not one or the other might in fact have some merit.

Attack the logic of an argument, not the one who says it: always the better plan. (Ad hominem means "against the man.")

You’re incorrect.  My thread title made no argument.

My first post made no argument.

If that’s what you see, perhaps the issue lies with you?

To be clear, I wasn’t attacking the argument because of who said it.     

My contention is not that Futurism is a false belief because Ribera said it or taught it, but that Futurism is a false belief because he created it out of whole cloth by pushing fulfilled prophecies back into the future once again to divert attention off the Pope.  

There is no ad hominem in pointing out the pedigree of a belief. 

You won’t find any Futurist commentaries on the Apocalypse before 1590, the year Ribera published his.  

Edited Wednesday at 05:59 PM by Excalibur

[Excalibur]

On 6/3/2025 at 6:33 PM, Michael37 said:

The cumulative effect of this is depicted in Revelation 13, and foretold in 2 Thessalonians 2.

I agree with what you said concerning the antichrist not being restricted to a singular individual.  

“Antichrist” is a category.  This applies equally to the man of sin and all three beasts in the Apocalypse…the latter representing kingdoms or dynasties of men, not individuals (see Daniel).
 

Ironically, your correct statement destroys the foundation of Futurist teaching.  

[Excalibur]

On 6/3/2025 at 5:47 PM, WilliamL said:

So you clearly state that neither 'false crafted scheme' has any theological merit -- without ever actually examining whether or not one or the other might in fact have some merit.

The more I read that statement of yours, the more ridiculous it sounds. 

If either scheme had any “theological merit,” it would’ve been discovered, preached, and taught by the saints through the ages. 

Instead, you would have us believe God’s people knew nothing about the proper interpretation of the Apocalypse until two Jesuit priests published their Futurist and Preterist commentaries 1500 years later, to counter the interpretations of the Protestant Reformers. 

Edited Thursday at 06:50 PM by Excalibur

[Alive]

Its interesting that antichrist is either against Christ or in place of…