Historicist vs Post Trib
The following is an email exchange between a historicist and Pastor Reckart. Pastor Reckart is one of the most brilliant writers of the Post-Trib message among Apostolics. Jesus is with him as he confronts falsehood and presents the Truth. The dialogue is being posted on the internet for the purpose of enlightenment. Many are being deceived with slick words and fair speeches of deceivers. Because many have no foundation in Truth and prophecy, they have little ability to discern falsehood as being false. God has given Pastor Reckart the unique ability to identify error and oppose it with Truth. When you read this dialogue, keep in mind your own beliefs may be challenged. If you disagree with anything Pastor Reckart writes, you need to take another look at what you believe, because you have been tricked into believing another gospel.
_________________________________
Mr. Historicist wrote: In short, I don't believe that the entire book of Revelation will take place during a seven year period, and that the beast will break his peace covenant after 3 ½ years and then the antichrist will reign.
RESPONSE BY PASTOR RECKART: I do not believe any of that either. I do not accept the broken peace treaty falsehood. The chapters dealing with the 7 churches are clearly a long time ago. And beginning in Revelation 20 there is a 1,000 year span of time before the end of the world. Then in conclusion, the book of Revelation describes the eternity of eternities with reference to a new heaven and a new earth.
Now as it relates to the three seven judgments, these are in a scheduled time mentioned as 1,260 days. Only if you spiritualize these days can you expand out of the time frame. I do not believe in a seven year tribulation. This is the dispensational doctrine of the delayed Daniel's 70th week. I see many of these judgment events outside of the 1,260 days. Jesus mentions them in Matthew 24 and there is no seven year time of fulfillment. However, I disagree this all took place before 70AD, and I also disagree that all this takes place over the centuries from the first Church until the coming of Jesus. There is something to be said about the things Paul prophesied and the time frame in which they must come to pass. Jesus used the word "generation." And he was not referring to the one in which he lived, but the one in which all these things would occur. This being the real truth of the matter, we can expect the fulfillment of all these things in the 7-7-7 in one generation. Now why would this be so difficult when preterist claim they all took place in a 40 year time span generation between 30-70AD? And why would the historicist spread all this out over 2,000 years when 2,000 years is not a generation no matter how you scheme it. Historicist try to spiritualize the 1,260 days into years. Below is a chart describing this. I have also included the gap theory and also the future post-trib doctrine. I did not shrink this down so you could look at it.
Mr. Historicist wrote: We are now the Church of Laodicea and only the last prophesies need to come in fulfillment,Armageddon,Gods scales,1000 year literal reign, Satan being loosed a last short time, the separation of the goats and sheep and judgment and then eternity.
RESPONSE BY PASTOR RECKART: Agree many churches are Laodicaea but not the true Body of Christ. That is why I do not accept the seven churches of Asia as being seven dispensations through which the Church must come. This would mean the last stage of the Church would be Laodicea and I refuse to accept the true Church ends in defeat. Rather, I see all seven churches as types of all churches. In other words come are like Ephesus, some like Sardis, some like Philadelphia and so forth. But the true Church must be like Philadelphia. But how can it be, if that is a dispensation church past in time? As for all that needs to come is Armageddon, then you must believe the antichrist is already come, the mark of the beast is past, the two witnesses are already dead and in heaven, the 144,000 are already saved and in heaven, and the multitude no man can number from all nations are already in heaven. That cannot be Christo. On the 1,000 you are correct it follows Armageddon. And on the end at judgment when the goats and sheep are separated you are right. You are not far off.
Mr. Historicist wrote: Tribulation started the day Jesus went up to heaven all the millions of Christians murdered in the coliseums etc
RESPONSE BY PASTOR RECKART: There is a difference in tribulation as described in the New Testament and the tribulation described in Matthew 24:29. The tribulation Jesus gave reference is in the times before his coming. He is not talking about tribulation that will occur in different places. He is talking about a global tribulation. While some of the events of the global tribulation may also be experienced on an individual basis and in some places, they were never global. Therefore they cannot fulfill the tribulation events Jesus predicted would come within one generation. Spreading these out over 2,000 years is false. 2,000 years is not a generation. Yes many died and they did experience tribulation but they did not experience the great tribulation or that generation is long past. That is impossible, Jesus would have had to come after that generation and he has not come yet. So similar events of tribulation does not mean the global one to come.
Mr. Historicist wrote: Martin Luther, John Knox and Wycliffe all believed in the historical interpretations. It was a catholic priest named Ribera who invented this evil futuristic doctrine to kick dust in the eyes of the reformers.
RESPONSE BY PASTOR RECKART: John Knox and Wycliffe never heard of Apostolic futurism as it was believed by the early Church. Anyone who claims the Apostolic Church did not believe in futurism is lying to themselves. And they did not know of the writings of early second century apologist. They did not know there was another group that opposed preterism. They chose the only alternative to preterism in their day. But they say the pope then living as the antichrist, not one far off in the future as historicist now accept. You have been reading someone's trash and lies where they misrepresent history. On Martin Luther, he was an Augustinian monk. As such he was a preterist the whole time of his life until about 1530. His 95 Thesis did not contain one element of the historicist doctrines. He even addressed the pope as having the Holy Spirit (see #9). In #47 he says Christians can buy indulgences as long as they are not commanded to buy them. In #49 he says the pope's pardon of those in purgatory is useful. There is nothing in these 95 Thesis written in 1517 that contains the historicist doctrines. He was converted to the historicist interpretation from preterism around 1525 when he married a nun. He was excomunicated in 1521. But as late as his letter to pope Leo in 1520 he was calling him: "most blessed father Leo." In 1526 Luther said that he had his mass and that other Catholic churches could have their own convents for nuns, their own parishes, and their own orders, meaning like his the Augustinian. He also said in that 1526 letter that he continued to use the Catholic "missae in latin, I do not want to set it aside or it to be changed." Then also in the same letter he said he didn't want the "latin tongue to disappear out of the divine service." He was a reformer of the Catholic church, not a reformer of Protestantism. Protestant by that name only means a protesting Catholic. One who protests about certain disagreeable things in the church of Rome.
Luther did switch to the historicist theory when he saw it needful to call Rome Babylon and the great whore and the pope the antichrist. But the historicist fabricate their own falsehoods. Shall the whore and the antichrist be spread over 2,000 years? Shall there be one pope who is the antichrist or 233 of them in succession? Or are we to understand the whore and the antichrist to be one spiritual whore and the antichrist to be one man? Christo, we cannot make this up and it all be conflicting with the Scriptures.
As for Ribera you have been hood-winked. You have been reading the lies of the preterist. Oh they hate him so bad. You say you have good sense to follow the Truth. Well, I will test that now.
Ribera was a Jesuit. He did write a book on the futuristic interpretation of prophecy. Now here is where I will test your honesty and your logic. Is it true Ribera was a Jesuit who was plotting to divert attention of the preterist and historicist away from Rome and the pope? Well, the preterist already believed the whore and the antichrist were before 70AD. So he did not need to answer their claims because if these were past, Rome could not be the whore and the pope could not be the antichrist. That is logical.
But, not for the historicist: they believed Rome was the whore and the pope Leo was the antichrist. Did Ribera's futurist interpretation change this? No! He did not say Rome was not the whore and the pope was not the antichrist. He simply said, the current pope was not the antichrist and there would be a future antichrist. He did not say Rome was not the whore, he said the revelation of the whore was still in the future. So, he did not produce a Jesuit plot to take any heat or attention from Rome or the Catholic church. He simply placed it all in the future.
Now to the accusation this was a Jesuit plot: Why is it, in the writings of Ribera that he goes back to the writings of Irenaeus and Hippolytus for his proofs of futurism? This shows these two men were not preterist. And they were not historicist. Both of these men saw 1,260 days and 42 months being literal. They did not associate Rome and the pope as being the whore and the antichrist. How could they, they did not exist? Ribera, in going back to these men was actually going against the preterist doctrines of his church. Now it makes about as much sense to say Luther's doctrines were a plot of the Augustinian monk order as it does to say Ribera's futuristic doctrine is a plot of the Jesuit monk order.
If by the name Jesuit the writings of Ribera are classified as a plot of Rome, then Rome invented a doctrine that became dispensational and very much anti-papal. The whole lie that Ribera invented the future rapture doctrine is false. Even historicist believe in a future rapture. They did not believe it was in 70AD. So his futuristic rapture agreed with the historicist doctrine.
Preterist believe in a future rapture at the end of the world, that is futuristic, now isn't it. At best, historicist are partial-historicist because they do believe some things are not fulfilled yet and are future.
The claim by preterist and historicist that Ribera invented the futuristic seven year tribulation theory is false. And to say he taught a pre-trib rapture is false. There is nothing in his book of a pre-trib rapture. There is in his book the belief the rapture would take place 45 days before the end of the 3.5 year tribulation. But notice this Christo, his was 45 days before the end of the 1,260 days or 42 months. This is not a pre-trib rapture. Ribera actually believed the Church would go through the tribulation of 42 months up to 45 days before its end.
I have challenged hundreds of preterist to produce any evidence the Jesuits as a secret group got Ribera to write his book. None have. I have challenged them to produce the evidence the Jesuits had a secret doctrine of the future antichrist and they have not. My challenges are deleted now on the preterist archives. They do not want anyone to challenge their lies. Ribera as a Jesuit does not mean the Jesuit order was behind his book or his opinions. To claim this, is a falsehood unless proven. These 30 years I have challenged and no one has produced. But the liars continue to lie and the deceivers continue to spread their falsehoods.
Mr. Historicist wrote: Most futurists also believe in a super computer beast and chip system and a secret rapture and so on. All to distract you of the real beast the Pope "Vicar of Christ"
RESPONSE BY PASTOR RECKART: No Mr. Historicist, I do not believe in all this pre-trib hype. And I do not believe the real beast is the pope. How many beast you going to have Mr. Historicist? The historicist in Luther's day said Leo was the beast. Let me count now: since Leo there have been 48 popes counting Leo. And the 49th is now in power. How many beasts Mr. Historicist? The historicist have them all as beasts. Is this biblical? No! There is one man who is identified as the beast, not many. In this historicist doctrine all the popes since the Nicene council are beasts. That means there has been 233 beasts. Mr. Historicist that is false. The real beast is the second horn of the second beast of Revelation 13. Go read it for yourself. It is one horn. It is one ruler. It is the one who is the false messiah to Israel. And no Jew will accept a Catholic pope as their messiah. No Jew will accept a Gentile as their messiah. All this Catholic preterism the beast was Nero is a lie. All of this claims there have been 233 beasts who were popes are all lies. Mr. Historicist, please, search this out honestly. I am testing your honesty.
Mr. Historicist wrote: Modern Jews and the type that crucified Jesus wasn't white, they mingled with the Edomites and Egyptians. There is a huge difference between a Jew and Jesus who came out of the tribe of Judah. To call Jesus a black man is the same thing as saying he is the same serpent line as the Pharisees. They had the serpent seed flowing in their veins. Jesus called the Pharisees a brood of vipers for the specific reason that they had satan as their father, that's not a metaphor or parable. Jesus said, you are of your father the devil.
RESPONSE BY PASTOR RECKART: I do not know where to begin with this one. You are way off base. Original Jews were not white people. You will never prove they were. All you can do is repeat the lies of the British-Israel prophets. Jesus was a Jew. A Jew is someone of the tribe of Judah. You actually believe Jesus was a white man. Well you need to read my study on this issue. Take time to go read this:
http://jesus-messiah.com/html/black-israelites.html
Mr. Historicist wrote: We all know that Satan and fallen angels produced offspring for a very long time and all sorts of nephilim were born. God wiped out Sodom AND GOMORA.
RESPONSE BY PASTOR RECKART: Mr. Historicist that is all false. Can you prove angels can even have sex? You are accepting the serpent seed doctrine of William Branham. The whole idea of fallen angels having sex with human women is as about as false as they come. The sons of God in this event are not angels. No wonder you believe in white race supremacy. You believe in the serpent seed doctrine that Eve and the serpent had sex, Cain was the first black man, and all his descendants were black. They had to be drowned. This means no black people have souls. Is this what you believe Mr. Historicist?
Mr. Historicist wrote: There was the 2 floods, all Gods attempts to wipe out these rebellious half breed angels and their offspring.
RESPONSE BY PASTOR RECKART: Two floods? Half breeds? Drowning black people? Mr Historicist are you sure you are as keen on Truth as you claim? If so, why are you accepting all these science-fiction tales?
Mr. Historicist wrote: David KILLED the Nephilim Goliath who cursed the God of Israel. Everybody also loves to say that Moses had a black Cushitic wife. Well, I also married a wife from Africa, and she is white.
RESPONSE BY PASTOR RECKART: Mr. Historicist, come on! Are you saying there were white Ethiopians in the time of Moses? I think you are playing games here.
Mr. Historicist wrote: I am very secure in what I believe and there is not one single area where I feel that I am uncertain about anything.
RESPONSE BY PASTOR RECKART: Well, you can be certain about a lot of false things Brother, but that will not make them right. Why are you any different than the Jehovah's Witnesses who are certain about so much? Truth is truth and when something is false it cannot be the Truth.
Mr. Historicist wrote: I might be extreme,and I know I will always be lashed at for believing what I believe. One day we will meet in heaven pastor and you will tell me that you thought I was extreme and very confused and deceived and so on, but in the end that I spoke the truth.
RESPONSE BY PASTOR RECKART: Well Mr. Historicist I think it will be the other way around. But, I fear you will not be saved. I fear you will believe a lot of lies. I can see already someone has been playing with your mind. Maybe several people. I believe some of the things you believe are not the true faith of a genuine believer in the true Gospel. When something is false concerning the Gospel, it is a false Gospel. A lot of what you believe comes from several false Gospels. I hope you can see this? I hope you do not get angry at my response. I hope the time I have spent in answering some of your statements was not in vain. I love you Mr. Historicist.
Mr. Historicist wrote: I hate all futurism. It was invented by a Jesuit priest named Ribera. I believe the white races are part of the lost ten tribes of Israel.
RESPONSE BY PASTOR RECKART: First, thanks for the pictures. You have a very beautiful wife and daughter. And you are a nice looking man, except for that long hair. What's up with the long hair?:
You are wrong on prophecy and the race of the Jews. The white Caucasians are not descended from the lost ten tribes. Jews were not white people. They were descended from Syria (Gen 25:20; 28:5; Deut 26:5, ). Then the 12 sons of Jacob took wives of the Canaanites. The Canaanites were not white people either. This whole idea of racial Israel is a falsehood. Israel, even if we think of it as a race of people, was all originally Gentile. Before there was an Abraham or Israel or Jews, there is only non-Israel, non-Jews, and all dictionaries will say a Gentile is a non-Jew or non-Israelite. The Israel of God for the New Testament is the Church. When I say Church I am referring to the original one existing on the day of Pentecost. And also those added to this same body over the centuries. This is the Israel of God. Paul calls it the olive tree in Romans 11. Into this the Gentiles are grafted of all nations. The introduction of racism into the Church is false. I really pray as you study you will come out of this. I have read all the fabrications about Manasseh and Ephraim being the tribes of the white people. This is impossible. Joseph had these two sons by an Egyptian black woman named Asenath (Gen 41:45). These two sons at best were half black and half white. And if Joseph being 4th generation Syrian was still brown skinned like Syrians, the children would be brown in the mixture. There is no white here. When I pointed this out to one of the British-Israelism prophets back in the 80s he said he never put those connections together. So far as I know he stopped spreading the lies of Herbert Armstrong and other B-Is. Please my brother, take another look. This racism is not acceptable.
On futurism, if you hate this, you are bad, bad wrong. Someone has distorted your thinking. No one can look at the Gospels and not see futurism. They cannot read the Epistles and not see futurism. The whole hope of the Church was in the future. The only time this doctrine changed is with the invention of preterism and the 70AD doctrine. This false doctrine ended all future hope since the resurrection and rapture (coming of Jesus) were said to have taken place in 70AD. You will NEVER come to the truth on this until you stop reading and studying preterism. Just like the dispensationalist, they must stop reading Darby, Larkin, Scofield, Ironside, Pentecost, Lindsey, La-Haye, and so on. Only when we lay down all this mess and pick up the Bible and let it speak will we know the Truth about the end times. If you hate futurism you will hate the doctrine that the end of the millennial and the end of the world has not occurred yet. The post-trib rapture and resurrection is different than past-trib preterism and pre-trib dispensationalism.
You are such a bright young man. I pray Jesus open your mind and you can pass through all the lies being spun, created, and spewed out from the mouth of the devil. The Church is still here. The Gospel is still being preached. Souls are still being born again. People are still dying in Christ. Jesus has not come yet. All these things and more are evidence futurism is still true.
Peace,
Pastor Reckart
July 8, 2010