Jovial (19 July 2015)
"The Early Church and the timing of the rapture - HOW THE REFORMATION CHANGED INTERPRETATION OF PROPHECY"

This series to date includes;

Reformation to Darby (1517 AD to 19th century AD)

Most of the great Reformers, from Luther to Calvin and others, said very little about the End Times.  Over time, Protestants tended to drift from the Preterism to the Yoachim theory to Pre-Millenialism.  Most early reformers simply believed what they were taught by the Catholic Church, which was dominantly the idea that that Church was in the Millenial age. But once the Reformation was unleashed, many Protestants felt free to disagree with the ancient Catholic position and several people appeared on the scene with a contrary view. 

The Reformation prompted 2 theories to rise in popularity among Protestants:

  • Yoachim's theory of a 1,260 year tribulation period with the Vatican as the Beast.
  • A return to the literal reading of "Chiliastism" or "Millenarianism" or what we today call "Pre-Millenialism" in Protestant circles. 

From what I have observed, it was Yoachim's theories that picked up steam first in the 16th century, then the return to Millenarianism in the 17th century thanks to Reformers who chose to simply believe what they read.

 

16th Century

In the 16th century, many Protestants LOVED Yoachim's theory of

  • the "Beast" as the Vatican,
  • the False Messiah was the office of the pope, not a person, and
  • the tribulation period started over 1200 years ago and we are near the tail end of it. 

Why?  Because it made the Catholic Church look bad.  Since they viewed the tribulation period as already started, they did not see a pre-trib rapture.  The early reformers omit any mention of a pre-trib rapture that I have been able to track down.

Thomas Brightman (1562-1607) taught the Yoachim theory, but using 1290 years instead of 1260. His best work on this wasn't published until after his death, in 1615, called Shall They Return to the Promised Land?, in which he proposed the restoration of Israel.

3 Jesuit priests began publishing to the Protestant world as part of what was called the "Counter Reformation."  They were;

  • Francisco Ribera (1537-1591) of Salamanca, wrote In Sacrum Beati Ioannis Apostoli, & Evangelistiae Apocalypsin Commentarij.
  • Cardinal Roberto Bellarmine (1542-1621) wrote Disputationes de controversiis christianae fidei, or Polemic Lectures Concerning the Disputed Points of the Christian Belief Against the Heretics of This Time.  It was about controversial subjects, and not just End Times.
  • Luis de Alcazar (1554-1613) wrote Vestigatio arcani sensus in Apocalypsi or Investigation of the Hidden Sense of the Apocalypse, published after his death.

Alcazar promoted Preterism and was trying to convince the Protestant world of that.  The other two men taught a future personal false messiah, and a future tribulation period.  Ribera quotes Bellermine while discussing if Rome was Babylon.  But Ribera said more about the second coming than Bellarmine.

If either were pre-trib, it doesn't change the picture much. I've already documented that Mede cited pre-trib as a possiblity about 30 years later. Both Ribera and Bellarmine wrote in Latin, so neither writer picks up a region or language group not already in the Dolcino / Mede circle of thought and either would only add 30 years to the idea's antiquity.  So the most significant part of their work was the return to pre-millenialism.  I have documented that Ribera was not pre-trib, being silent on the issue and writing nothing about it.  I haven't read Bellermine, but I suspect the same since no one has ever published a pre-trib quote from him, and if he said something, we should be able to cite it.

It seems the Vatican had now decided that the historical view of Revelation was working against them. People were not buying the "We're in the Millenium" theology and many people were buying the "We're in the 1,260 years of Tribulation", partly because the inquisition was putting real Christians to death. After promoting the idea that Revelation is past tense for 1200-1300 years, the Catholic Church realized this theory was working against them, and a literal futuristic interpretation was now better for the Catholic Church's corporate interests.

 

17th century

I talked earlier about Joseph Mede (1586 – 1639) at http://www.fivedoves.com/letters/may2015/jovial531-3.htm and how he embraced Millenarianism and presented 3 possible timings for the rapture in his 1629 letter;

  • After the 1000 year reign
  • After the Tribulation, but before the 1000 years.
  • Before the Tribulations

Mede saw many of seals in Revelation as historic, but saw everything from chapter 11 onward as futuristic, reserved for the end times.  His book became very popular and twice he was offered the Provost position at his college, but he turned it down.

Pierre Jurieu (1637-1713) said Mede's work "did heretofore charm me."  He accepted many of Mede's historical interpretations of Revelation, but not the future Pre-Millenialistic view.   He embraced Yoachim's  theory and predicted the return of Messiah for 1689 as well as an alternate date of 2015 (the year I am writing this).  He made the mistake of trying to fit all the events of Revelation into his own time and culture, which many people do today as well.  Instead, we should try to see the picture Revelation is projecting, and ask ourselves what must change in order for that picture to arise.  He quoted Pierre du Moulin's prediction of 2015 in one part of his book (Accomplishments of Prophecy) and presented his own theory of why 2015 might be an alternate date for the end of the Catholic Church in yet another place.  I will avoid quoting the various passages talking about 2015, but if you are interested in learning more, read his book IN FULL.  It is hard to appreciate the WHY behind his logic unless you get the entire base of logic behind his thinking.

There were many other writers in this time period, including Isaac Newton, and I have provided a more complete list at the end of this section.

18th Century

In 1700, John Asgill wrote a book called, "An Argument Proving ...Man may be Translated...."  Elipses show omission to a VERY long title.  MANY people reference this as "proof" that the pre-trib rapture was around before Darby, but this book is not about a pre-trib rapture.  Asgill discusses the "resurrection at the last day", but never talks about the False Messiah, the tribulation period, or the Beast or Revelation.  He only talks about the resurrection.  I read his entire book and still don't know if he believes in a False Messiah or if he believes there will be a tribulation period sometime in the future.  He could be a Preterist for all I can tell.  He talks of how men might be "translated" at the resurrection, but never advocates this will happen prior to the tribulation period and he may not even believe in a tribulation period for all I can tell.

The House proceedings recorded in one modern re-printing of the book (click here) says his publisher was named John Darby, but not the same John Nelson Darby, born 100 years later in 1800.  Perhaps the earlier one was the later's grandfather or related somehow.

In 1742, Morgan Edwards proposed a definite pre-trib rapture theology, saying....

"The distance between the first and second resurrection will be somewhat more than a thousand years. I say, somewhat more--, because the dead saints will be raised, and the living changed at Christ's 'appearing in the air' (1 Thess. 4:17); and this will be about three years and a half before the millennium, as we shall see hereafter: but will he and they abide in the air all that time? No: they will ascend to paradise, or to some one of those many 'mansions in the Father's house' (John 14:2)." (Two Academical Exercises, 7)

The only logical way he would have added 3.5 to 1000 would be if he believed in some sort of pre-trib or mid-trib rapture.  HOWEVER, he is picturing the entire resurrection happening 3.5 years before Armageddon.

He is teaching another error that was common during this time period that many attribute to originating with Mede; that being that the New Heaven and New Earth would happen BEFORE the 1000 year reign.  This concept was later abandoned by most people by the 19th century.

Many people reference Edwards without quoting him for reasons similar to Dolcino, but not as extreme.  The quote has multiple timing problems.  He's got the first resurrection before the trib too, when Revelation clearly puts it at Armageddon.  He says believers will live in heaven instead of on earth.  It is rather easy for post-tribbers to shoot holes through this quote by pointing out how confused he was on the timing of things most people would not argue about.

So the idea was out there before Darby and before the Plymouth Brethren.  In fact they might have read Edwards.

19th Century

By the early 1800s, the idea of the rapture was floating around the Plymouth Brethren.  Darby, born 1800, began teaching the concept and helped to ignite interest in the concept in many areas.

 

OTHERS

Below are some of the more famous writers from this period with links to their profiles or writings.

Shalom,

Joe