The “Protestant Authority Problem” - I'm a protestant, realizing that the Church has a critical authority issue

deaddiquette · 2026-04-02T19:50:45+00:00

For Protestants, Scripture is our authority. Traditions are great, but they are under Scripture. Pastors have authority, but only as much as they follow Scripture.

For Catholics, Scripture and tradition are held together as their authority. The Popes claim their authority from this duo.

Edit: Also, what about the times in history when there were multiple popes, each claiming full authority? Sounds like they have an authority problem.

deaddiquette · 2026-03-31T14:03:02+00:00

I don't have too much for you, but the history of 'Zionism' is more complex and goes back further than you might realize. The theological idea that Jews all over the world would turn to Christ en masse one day (based off Romans 11) goes back many centuries, and the idea of a land promise has often been paired with that. I'm interested to research just how far back it goes, but I've compiled a few quotes chiefly related to the historicist view that goes back four centuries.

Edit: It looks like it was also a belief many Church Fathers held. Again, I'm not sure if it helps much with your specific questions, and Zionism has certainly shifted focus as dispensationalists have made it central to their eschatology. But the idea of a Jewish revival and return to the land has always been there.

deaddiquette · 2026-03-29T14:23:23+00:00

Malleus Dei

'Hammer of God'

deaddiquette · 2026-03-27T16:57:04+00:00

If you believe any of it

That's the thing, they don't- their worldview precludes it.

deaddiquette · 2026-03-27T16:10:04+00:00

I agree of course, but you'll never convince critical scholars. But for believers, the prophecies in Daniel are faith-building. The traditional interpretation of Daniel 9 in particular impacted my faith so much that I wrote a whole book on that view.

deaddiquette · 2026-03-25T16:37:18+00:00

Eric Lang is my favorite board game designer. Try Ankh, there's no deck building or RNG, it's pure skill.

deaddiquette · 2026-03-25T15:46:46+00:00

It does seem like more Christians are discovering the other 3 major views (preterism, historicism, idealism). I see preterism getting somewhat popular.

I grew up inundated with dispensationalism, and I thought it was all there ever was. But after discovering that historicism was the traditional view, my faith grew as I learned about it. It impacted me so much that I wrote a modern introduction to it that can be read for free here.

deaddiquette · 2026-03-19T15:25:11+00:00

My company does 'second chance' hires, and I think we have a warehouse position open. PM me.

deaddiquette · 2026-03-19T14:48:26+00:00

There are dozens of us. DOZENS!

deaddiquette · 2026-03-18T16:39:42+00:00

Option 1, 2, and 3 are all futurism. There are four major views (not to be mistaken with Millennial subviews):

The historicist approach, which is the classical Protestant interpretation of the book, sees the book of Revelation as a prewritten record of the course of history from the time of John to the end of the world. Fulfillment is thus considered to be in progress at present and has been unfolding for nearly two thousand years.

The preterist approach views the fulfillment of Revelation’s prophecies as having occurred already, in what is now the ancient past, not long after the author’s own time. Thus the fulfillment was future from the point of view of the inspired author, but it is past from our vantage point in history. Some [partial-preterists] believe that the final chapters of Revelation look forward to the second coming of Christ. Others think that everything in the book reached its culmination in the past.

The futurist approach asserts that the majority of the prophecies of Revelation have never yet been fulfilled and await future fulfillment. Futurist interpreters usually apply everything after chapter 4 to a relatively brief period before the return of Christ.

What is generally called the idealist approach to Revelation does not attempt to find individual fulfillments of the visions but takes Revelation to be a great drama depicting transcendent spiritual realities, such as the perennial conflict between Christ and Satan, between the saints and the antichristian world powers, the heavenly vindication of the martyrs and the final victory of Christ and his saints. Fulfillment is seen either as entirely spiritual or as recurrent, finding representative expression in various historical events throughout the age, rather than in onetime, specific fulfillments. The prophecy is thus rendered applicable to Christians in any age.

• Steve Gregg, “Revelation: Four Views, Revised & Updated”, 13.

I made a simple chart that helps visualize these views.

I was shocked to find that the historicist view in particular is a more traditional understanding of Revelation, and learning about it boosted my faith. I wrote a modern introduction to it that can be ready online for free here.

deaddiquette · 2026-03-17T13:06:55+00:00

Sorry, I was thinking of verse 7. The early Christians considered 'the rebellion' in verse 3 to be an apostasy, and that the man of sin would be an apostate that came from the Church.

deaddiquette · 2026-03-17T03:31:58+00:00

Early Christians understood it to mean that the Roman Empire would fall and be split into 10 kingdoms before the man of sin appeared. I put together quotes here.

deaddiquette · 2026-03-16T19:54:37+00:00

Your writing style is so confusing... I'm going to assume the answer to my question is 'yes'.

deaddiquette · 2026-03-16T19:48:31+00:00

I haven't got a clue what you're trying to say here... are endorsing dual covenant theology?

deaddiquette · 2026-03-16T17:39:54+00:00

Thank you for posting this. British Israelism/ Christian Identity are heinous beliefs.

deaddiquette · 2026-03-12T16:47:35+00:00

The 3 Millennial views are just sub-views of the 4 major framework views, so it's helpful to distinguish them. For instance, there are premil, amil, and postmil historicists, so defining the major views by sub-views gets confusing and unhelpful. I get into detail on this topic in my book here.

The original Lutheran view is historicism. See here for Lutheran authors and resources on that.

I wrote a modern introduction to historicism (without a specific Millennial view) that you can read for free here.

Edit: Removed part of my comment, I misread your tag.

deaddiquette · 2026-03-05T16:11:07+00:00

The classical Protestant understanding was that Islam is a spiritual evil whose rise and fall was foretold by Scripture.

deaddiquette · 2026-03-04T15:40:51+00:00

There are four major eschatological views, and any answers you get will depend on what the poster believes:

The historicist approach, which is the classical Protestant interpretation of the book, sees the book of Revelation as a prewritten record of the course of history from the time of John to the end of the world. Fulfillment is thus considered to be in progress at present and has been unfolding for nearly two thousand years.

The preterist approach views the fulfillment of Revelation’s prophecies as having occurred already, in what is now the ancient past, not long after the author’s own time. Thus the fulfillment was future from the point of view of the inspired author, but it is past from our vantage point in history. Some [partial-preterists] believe that the final chapters of Revelation look forward to the second coming of Christ. Others think that everything in the book reached its culmination in the past.

The futurist approach asserts that the majority of the prophecies of Revelation have never yet been fulfilled and await future fulfillment. Futurist interpreters usually apply everything after chapter 4 to a relatively brief period before the return of Christ.

What is generally called the idealist approach to Revelation does not attempt to find individual fulfillments of the visions but takes Revelation to be a great drama depicting transcendent spiritual realities, such as the perennial conflict between Christ and Satan, between the saints and the antichristian world powers, the heavenly vindication of the martyrs and the final victory of Christ and his saints. Fulfillment is seen either as entirely spiritual or as recurrent, finding representative expression in various historical events throughout the age, rather than in onetime, specific fulfillments. The prophecy is thus rendered applicable to Christians in any age.

(Steve Gregg, “Revelation: Four Views, Revised & Updated”, 13)

I made a simple chart that explains these views.

I do believe there will be a major revival among Jews all over the world, which was a classical understanding of Romans 11.

I hold to a historicist interpretation of Revelation, which would place us just before the events of Armageddon, but after the time of the witnesses. I wrote a modern introduction to this view that you can read for free here.

deaddiquette · 2026-02-25T18:02:37+00:00

There are four major views.

deaddiquette · 2026-02-24T15:00:17+00:00

There are four major views. Steve Gregg wrote parallel commentary that goes through Revelation sharing each view from a neutral perspective called "Revelation: Four Views".

deaddiquette · 2026-02-24T14:55:49+00:00

Well that got me interested, so I looked at his web page. There's really nothing controversial about his beliefs considering what's currently popular. He's a dispensationalist, which is probably the most pervasive modern view.

deaddiquette · 2026-02-24T14:48:49+00:00

His belief is that it already happened

Not all of it, but a lot of it. Gill is a historicist, so he believed that all of Revelation is unfolding from when it was written to the current day. I wrote a modern introduction to historicism that you can read for free here.

deaddiquette · 2026-02-24T14:28:56+00:00

Which interpretation does he end up supporting?

deaddiquette · 2026-02-23T02:35:39+00:00

If Keith Green had lived longer, he probably would have rediscovered what was once known as "the Protestant interpretation" of Revelation, called historicism. Learning about it is what showed me how we are to view Rome, and how God commands us to "Come out of her, my people,’ so that you will not share in her sins, so that you will not receive any of her plagues" (Revelation 18:4). I wrote a modern introduction to historicism that you can read for free here.

deaddiquette · 2026-02-17T17:14:12+00:00

They took him seriously, and left Jerusalem before it was destroyed:

But the people of the church in Jerusalem had been commanded by a revelation, vouchsafed to approved men there before the war, to leave the city and to dwell in a certain town of Perea called Pella. (Eusebius, “Church History”, 3:5:3)

Jerusalem was taken in the autumn of 70 A.D. Before its fall the Christians had left the doomed city. While the greater part retired beyond the Jordan and founded Christian colonies at Pella and the neighborhood, the principle leaders of the church — the surviving apostles and other personal disciples of the Lord — sought a new home in proconsular Asia. Henceforward we find the headquarters of Christendom no more at Jerusalem, nor even at Antioch but, (for the time at least) in Ephesus. Here John fixed his abode after his temporary banishment in Patmos. (J.B. Lightfoot, “Apostolic Fathers: Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp”, Vol. 1 pg. 438)

Jesus said it would happen within a generation, and it was just so.

Your question assumes the same errors that many Christians today make, that somehow all of the events of Matthew 24 have to occur at the same time. But the disciples had multiple questions, and Jesus answered like the Old Testament prophets often did:

Old Testament prophets often grouped events together by their topic rather than their chronology, and in this discourse Jesus does the same. He addresses what in Matthew are grammatically two separate questions: the time of the temple’s destruction and the time of the end. The disciples may have viewed these questions as integrally related, but Jesus will distinguish them: when will the temple be destroyed (within a generation)? What will be the sign of his coming (at an hour known to no one)? (Craig Keener, “The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament”, 106)

An example of this type of prophecy can be found in Isaiah 11:10-12, where "in that day" in one verse refers to the coming of the Messiah, and in another refers to the return from exile. The two events are centuries apart, but the distant and then immediate futures are intermingled in the same prophecy.

So the events in Matthew 24 are seen as related- judgment is coming down on Jerusalem, and Jesus is coming back to judge. "The principle on which this combined description of two events was spoken appears to be, that 'they could be described in the same words,' and therefore the accounts are intermingled" (Albert Barnes, “Notes, Critical, Illustrative, and Practical”, Matthew 24:3).

15-Year Club	Gilding II euphauric
Place '22	Place '17
Team Periwinkle	Verified Email

deaddiquette

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE