Teaching of the Apostle John

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by agedman, Sep 26, 2015.

  1. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    187
    In the recent threads on end times, I attempted to insert a bit of historical view that would hopefully impact the thinking of some on the BB (not that I really expect that to happen - but to give such at least a chance).

    Because the Apostle John lived a full life and died toward the end of the first century, there were outstanding teachers, preachers, martyrs which had direct and were first hand witnesses to and in some cases disciples of the Apostle John.

    One of the most outstanding items is that EVERY one of them were Pre-mil.

    Now, if John was an Apostle (and he was) then it would seem as though he would have diligently corrected the "error" and teaching of end times these people did. There is absolutely NO RECORD that he did.

    So, here then is the problem.

    On the BB there are those who would contend for a view of the Revelation that the Apostle did not teach.

    On the BB there are those who would contend for a view of the prophets that the Apostle did not teach.

    On the BB there are those who would attempt to dispute with the actual writer of the Revelation in desire to preach and teach what the Apostle John would dispute.

    How then can such ones make claims that those that teach and preach what the Apostle John taught and handed down to those he taught claim that John is "bewitched?"

    And to think that some of the BB actually find it amusing!

    Can ANYONE name a single disciple of John or one that John had direct contact with that was NOT pre-mil?
     
  2. Jordan Kurecki

    Jordan Kurecki
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 26, 2013
    Messages:
    1,452
    Likes Received:
    60
    How many people connected to the Apostle John do we even know their views on of end times?
     
  3. Reformed

    Reformed
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Messages:
    1,227
    Likes Received:
    57
    The burden is on the author of the OP to produce an exhaustive list of direct disciples of the Apostle John who were Chilists.
     
  4. Martin Marprelate

    Martin Marprelate
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    2,505
    Likes Received:
    454
    According to Acts 20:30, Paul was expecting some of the elders in Ephesus whom he had taught to go rogue in one way or another. Why should John fare any better?
     
  5. McCree79

    McCree79
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    1,136
    Likes Received:
    34
    The earliest ones I know of is Justin Martyr and Irenaeus. Neither directly taught by John. Irenaeus was close to Polycarp though. So if we want to say since Irenaeus learned from a disciple of John, that his millennium view must be correct, we must also embrace that water baptism brings new life and start baptizing infants. That was also the belief of Irenaeus

    Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk
     
    #5 McCree79, Sep 26, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 26, 2015
  6. McCree79

    McCree79
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    1,136
    Likes Received:
    34
    Zero

    Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk
     
  7. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    187
    Do I have to do all the work for you?

    I will give you this statement from here.
    Premillennialism was the most widely held view of the earliest centuries of the church. Philip Schaff has said, "The most striking point in the eschatology of the ante-Nicene Age (A.D. 100-325) is the prominent chiliasm, or millenarianism, . . . a widely current opinion of distinguished teachers, such as Barnabas, Papia, Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Methodius, and Lactantius." (History of the Christian Church, Scribner, 1884; Vol. 2, p. 614) bold emphasis mine.
    Papia(s) was a pastor in a near city to the Apostle John in Ephesus. He often traveled to visit the apostle to get first hand accounts of what the apostles said and the words of Jesus.

    Michael J. Vlach, Ph.D. (see here) wrote:
    "Irenaeus was also a strong believer in premillennialism. In fact, premillennialism was a major a weapon in Irenaeus’s battle against Gnosticism and its unbiblical dualism between matter and spirit."

    Iranaeus states of Polycarp, "But Polycarp also was not only instructed by apostles, and conversed with many who had seen Christ, but was also, by apostles in Asia, appointed bishop of the Church in Smyrna, whom I also saw in my early youth, for he tarried [on earth] a very long time, and, when a very old man, gloriously and most nobly suffering martyrdom, departed this life, having always taught the things which he had learned from the apostles, and which the Church has handed down, and which alone are true." ( Adv. Haer., III.3.4.)

    Polycarp stated
    Polycarp 11:2
    "But he who cannot govern himself in these things, how doth he enjoin this upon another? If a man refrain not from covetousness, he shall be defiled by idolatry, and shall be judged as one of the Gentiles who know not the judgment of the Lord, Nay, know we not, that the saints shall judge the world, as Paul teacheth?"
    How do the saints judge the world if the there is no place and time of that justice to be met?

    Another source of good information on this topic is found here. It gives a very factual report as to the historical position of the early church and the shift to a-mil and post-mil that were actually considered heretical views. How that when the popularity of those views grew the pre-mil view(s) were then considered heretical.

    That shift was done as a direct affront to the apostles and those directly taught by them.
     
    #7 agedman, Sep 26, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 26, 2015
  8. DHK

    DHK
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    134
    I find some of the same information that agedman does. Premillennialism goes right back to the apostles. Virtually all the anti-nicene fathers believed. Schaff being quoted by Ice states:
    http://www.pre-trib.org/articles/view/brief-history-of-early-premillennialism

    Certainly we don't maintain that their beliefs were exactly the same as ours.
    But what are they:
    A belief in a Millennial Kingdom on earth.
    A belief in a pre-millennial second coming.
    A belief in the judgment after the millennial Kingdom.

    Believe it or not, if one is objective they will admit that the above three eras are "dispensations," and hence "dispensationalism." Just because it doesn't fall into the "Darby-defined interpretation" of dispensationalism doesn't mean it isn't dispensationalism. It has dispensations. It has order. It fits the basic definition of what dispensationalism is. One cannot dismiss this so lightly.

    Here is another point that Ireneus believed in (from the same article) :
    Not exactly the same; but very close to what many of us believe.

    Notice the last statement of the previous quote:
    This is exactly what we find in the early church in regards to premillennialism before allegorical interpretation began to dominate.
    Allegorical interpretation was "invented" by Origen. It did not exist before the fourth century. As another biased source provided by Icon claimed: "a literal approach to the Bible is a novel characteristic of dispensationalism." Obviously such a statement if blatantly false. The early church took the scriptures very literally.
     
  9. McCree79

    McCree79
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    1,136
    Likes Received:
    34
    This claim is without proof. Eusebius(H.E. III 39) states that he was a disciple of John the the Presbyter, not John the Apostle.

    The legend is that Papais and Irenaeus traveled to learn from the Apostle himself. If that is true, then surely they(including Justin Martyr) are right about infant baptism and that water baptism is the source of salvation. Do you believe Irenaeus on that one?



    Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk
     
  10. McCree79

    McCree79
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    1,136
    Likes Received:
    34
    That in no way is stating a premil view.

    Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk
     
  11. McCree79

    McCree79
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    1,136
    Likes Received:
    34
    Even though early church members did hold to pre mil view. That doesn't make them pre-trib-dispensationalists

    Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk
     
  12. Reformed

    Reformed
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Messages:
    1,227
    Likes Received:
    57
    And thus the ever an anon problem of trying to use the patristic age to support doctrinal positions. You pointed to one: baptismal regeneration. The patristic age was full of truth and error. And as others have pointed out, historic premillennialism differed greatly from dispensational premillennialism.
     
  13. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    187
    This is a mere distraction from the truth of the pre - mil view point seen and taught by the Apostle John.

    Infant baptism has more to do with the a-mil folks than those who hold pre-mil views.
     
  14. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    187
    That really isn't an issue, is it.

    See BOTH of them (pre-mil and disp) are Pre-mil.

    So making such a claim as you did, only supports the fact that the Apostles taught Pre-mil view as accurate and Scriptural.
     
  15. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    187

    But again, they are BOTH pre-mil.

    So, what is the problem some have with accepting the Pre-mil as the truth?

    Discussions of Baptismal regeneration is just a distraction and not germane to the truth of the Pre-mil view.
     
  16. DHK

    DHK
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    134
    A red herring.
    Shall I point out that Calvin was baptized as an infant, saw his infant baptism as a valid baptism accepted by the Lord and went on to persecute those who baptized by immersion after having made a confession of faith in Christ--the Anabaptists. Totally unscriptural.
     
  17. Reformed

    Reformed
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2012
    Messages:
    1,227
    Likes Received:
    57
    You are the one trying to use the patristic age to make your point. History is a great teacher, but it is interpreted differently by many. Historic pre-mil, dispensational pre-mil, a-mil, and post-mil are all orthodox eschatological views. If you really want to be a student of history, do some research on how all major eschatological views have had their period of dominance. A lot of that has to do with how each era interpreted its worldview. There is a reason who so many learned theologians throughout history were either loosely convicted of, or even undecided, when it came to eschatology. Aside from the general agreement that the Lord Jesus Christ will visibly return, eschatology is not one of those slam-dunk doctrines. If you are persuaded about one view over another, let it be because you have exhaustively studied the scriptures. Appealing to church history is a post-facto attempt to add credibility to your position.
     
  18. JamesL

    JamesL
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2013
    Messages:
    2,247
    Likes Received:
    76
    I'm convinced of a PreMil view, but have to tip my hat here. I believe an apostle's student or associate could possibly add credence to a view, but not necessarily.

    I'm not a big fan of gulping down 2nd-3rd century doctrine without comparing what they said to scripture.

    It just seems to me that pretty early on the church started veering from apostolic teaching. Is Eschatology one of those areas?

    We should compare historic teaching to scripture at every point. Otherwise we might be building error upon error
     
  19. McCree79

    McCree79
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2015
    Messages:
    1,136
    Likes Received:
    34
    By acknowledging that is all it takes for something to be true....for a 2nd century teacher to believe something, then by you own logic you must hold to infant baptism. You can't have it both ways. You can't say Apostle John taught the man pre-mil, and not accept the argument that he taught him infant baptism.


    Sent from my LGLS990 using Tapatalk
     
  20. DHK

    DHK
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2000
    Messages:
    37,982
    Likes Received:
    134
    The point being made is not that pre-mil is based on history but that it existed before Darby. There are many on this forum who don't believe it did. There is a big gap between the anti-nicene fathers and the mid-1800's. Burt it is not hard to show various individuals that believed in a "millennial kingdom" throughout history.
     

Share This Page

Loading...