The Jesuit Origins Of Dispensationalism?

The claim that the Jesuits invented Dispensationalism seems to be appearing more and more these days.  This is nothing more than a deflection.  The ultimate issue is “WHAT SAITH THE SCRIPTURES?”.  We should look in the Scriptures (if you have them) to see if Dispensationalism is true or not.  If we look to some supposed inventor like Darby, Scofield, or even the Jesuit Lacunza and think that the truth of Dispensationalism hinges on that, we have started from a Catholic way of thinking.  The Pope wants to you argue about the antiquity of the origin of a doctrine instead of looking at the Scriptures.  Regardless of any claims about Lacunza or Bellarmine or Ribera, we MUST stick to the question of “What Saith The Scriptures?”  When we do, we will see that the inventors of Dispensationalsim were Christ and Paul and ultimately, God himself.  Any information about Chilean Jesuits doesn’t factor into the equation.  Unless you think like a Catholic instead of a Bible Believer.

We must note the irony that when people claim a Jesuit origin of Dispensationalism they are the ones who are actually acting like Jesuits. 🙂

————————————————————————————————————————

Today we will critique this article.

As always, my comments are in BOLD.

Start Article:

I got this from http://theologyreview.com/index.php?topic=7011.0 I consider it the clearest and most thorough explanation I have heard to date of why evangelicals believe what they believe about the Endtime.

1. The Jesuits created the modern system of dispensational futurism. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.  Of course this man provides nothing of the sort.  The vast majority of Dispensationalists are fully aware of the role played by the Whore of Babylon, aka the Church of Rome, in the end times.  If it was invented by the Jesuits, then how come so many Dispensationalists are so Anti-Rome?  He would need some extraordinary evidence to back that claim.  The author provides none. Although the Jesuits derived certain aspects of this myth from “futuristic elements” embedded in the teachings of the early church fathers, PROOF? the evidence is clear that they elaborated the elements of this myth from the early church fathers as a tool to destroy and counter the Protestant Reformation by attempting to lift the heat off the Papacy as the identity of Antichrist.PROOF?

2. The theological elements of Futurism are derived from the extra-biblical writings, such as: The Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, The Sibylline Oracles, Baruch, 1st and 2nd Esdras, T. Levi, The Ascension of Isaiah, etc. etc.PROOF? And even if there were some connections given, again, this is nothing more than a distraction to the real question: “What Saith The Scriptures?”

3. The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha writings were written by Hellenistic Jews. These Jews mixed Babylonian, Persian, and Greek paganism with Judaism. PROOF? And even if there were some connections given, again, this is nothing more than a distraction to the real question: “What Saith The Scriptures?”

4. Long before the first advent of Christ, mystical Jews believed that an anti-messiah would come and oppose the Messiah; the anti-messiah was called “Beliar”; and he was believed to be the devil incarnate in human form. PROOF? And even if there were some connections given, again, this is nothing more than a distraction to the real question: “What Saith The Scriptures?”

5. The early Church Fathers such as Ireneaus, Hippolytus, Apollinaris and others, borrowed Futurist elements from these mythical, pseudepigraphal writings, which served to shape their views of end-time events. PROOF? And even if there were some connections given, again, this is nothing more than a distraction to the real question: “What Saith The Scriptures?”

6. The Jesuits created Futurism from the Beliar myth found in these writings, indicating that modern Dispensational Futurist theology is nothing more than pagan mythology convoluted around real scripture. PROOF? And even if there were some connections given, again, this is nothing more than a distraction to the real question: “What Saith The Scriptures?”

7. The Protestants of the Reformation era knew about this fable, and Protestants separated the real Bible from the extra-Biblical writings. PROOF? And even if there were some connections given, again, this is nothing more than a distraction to the real question: “What Saith The Scriptures?”

8. When the Protestants studied the Bible without the fables of the Catholic Church fathers – the Beliar myth – they clearly identified the Papacy as the Antichrist. PROOF? And even if there were some connections given, again, this is nothing more than a distraction to the real question: “What Saith The Scriptures?”

9. Modern Protestant Churches the world over have abandoned the Protestant Reformation, and they now teach Catholic theology from the Council of Trent which commenced in 1545 A.D. Now this fool is claiming that Dispensationalism is from the Council of Trent…. I’d absolutely love to see even the slightest shed of proof for this.  None is given.  The Jesuit Cardinals Francisco Ribera (1537-1591) and Robert Bellarmino (1542-1621) in the 16th and 17th centuries were foremost at setting out to accomplish this Protestant destroying task in scraping every bit of knowledge they could formulate from the Early Church Fathers to concoct and repackage the fantastical Jesuit scheme of Futurism. Proof?  There is no proof that of ANY supposed connections between the doctrines taught by these men is in any way similar to the doctrines preached by Bible Believing King James Dispensationalists.  But if you are trying to justify your hatred of the truth, then you’ll take any port in the storm, I suppose.  Jesuit Cardinal Manuel de Lacunza in the early 19th century, also an advocate of Futurism, deliberately attempted to take the pressure off the papacy by proposing that the Antichrist was still off in the future, The Scriptures say that he is.  This doesn’t change the fact the Rome is, right now, the Whore of Babylon.  Rev 17:8 and 11 show that the Antichrist existed before John wrote, didn’t exist at that time, and then would be coming back later.  As much as you want to twist the truth, that isn’t true of the Roman Church, that is true of the Antichrist, aka Judas himself… and also laid the foundation for much of modern-day dispensational ideology. Proof? On the other hand, the Spanish Jesuit Luis de Alcazar (1554-1613) in the 16th and 17th century was set to the task of concocting the Preterist scheme. Both schemes blossomed about the same time and successfully got the “heat” off the Papacy from detection of Antichrist. The Antichrist is a man not an institution according to the Scriptures.  The Whore of Babylon is the Roman Church.   It took about 300 years before the Protestant world allowed itself to become infected by these two deadly viruses. Meanwhile the followers of Luther and Calvin continued sprinkling babies, controlling armies, and teaching the monstrous “god” of the Calvinistic system. But this guy is mad about teaching that the Antichrist is a man and not the Roman Church…  Dr. Maitland, James H. Todd, Henry Newman (who later became a Catholic Cardinal after accepting Futurism This makes no sense…), Irving, and later Darby and Scofield all came to accept major elements of Ribera’s and Bellarmine’s fantastical views of a singled-out, future, one-man Antichrist (stemming from the Beliar myth that comes from Persian dualism and Zoroastrianism) as well as the incredible disjointed “gap” theory by which the Jesuits adopted from Hippolytus’ erroneous construing of the first 69 units, or weeks of years, as reaching from the first year of Cyrus (or Darius the Mede) to the incarnation of Christ–a chronological impossibility without elongating the period. This “faulty reasoning” of Hippolytus inspired modern Futurism’s “gap” theory.  No, my friend these ideas came from the Scriptures.  I have upwards of 30 articles on the subject on this blog.  If you don’t believe me, then read my articles and test them by the Final Authority.  By “Final Authority” I mean the King James Bible, not the writings of the Reformers and Church “babies”. 

10. Dispensationalism is simply another branch of Catholicism—developed by the Jesuits in the Counter Reformation. What a ridiculous assertion.  I know of a Dispensationalist that rented a plane and dropped Gospel tracts all over the Vatican.  Yet Dispensationalism is a “branch of Catholicism”?  You could just as erroneously reason that you shouldn’t drink water because rat poison has water in it… After all is said and done, the Roman Catholic Jesuits must still be identified as being responsible for concocting and inventing the Futurist schemes of prophetic interpretation seen so rampant today in the Protestant and Evangelical world. Why? Because they concocted their Futurist interpretations based on outdated futuristic “outdated futuristic”?  What a combo, man.  elements embedded in the teachings of the Church Fathers who thought the world would end no later than AD 500, not to mention many of their Futuristic views were shaped through the lenses of the extra-Biblical, Psuedepigraphal books written by uninspired authors. After the passing of some 1000 years, the Protestant Reformers were able to look back in retrospect comparing history with prophecy and were clearly able to see the manifestation of Antichrist and that Little Horn of Daniel 7 in the Roman Church State.  So we wrap up the article by once again demonstrating how many liberties these guys take when applying the text.  There may be some connections between the Little Horn and a handful of references to the Antichrist to the Roman system.  But please notice that he deliberately doesn’t bring up 2 Thess 2 and Revelation 13 which teach a literal person is the Antichrist as opposed to a system. 

In 2 Thess 2, the AC is called the “Man of Sin” and not the church of sin or the office of sin in vs 3.  He sits in the “temple of God” not the Vatican.  He has the Jewish signs which the Pope doesn’t.  Since this text doesn’t fit his system, then he just ignores it.  Typical…

In Rev 13, we see that the AC is wounded as it were to death.  You would have to abort the to make this apply to the RCC. You would have to ignore the time period given as forty and two months to make it fit the RCC.  He blasphemes the “tabernacle” which the Papacy has never done.  Beyond that, the rest of the chapter doesn’t fit Rome, it fits a man that will come in the future.  

Don’t worry about these jokers.  They have cut themselves on the sharp two edged sword and they are scared to take it up again.  Don’t fall for their false accusation about the origin of Dispensationalism.  Look no further than the pages of the New Testament to find where God invented Dispensationalism. 

 

2 thoughts on “The Jesuit Origins Of Dispensationalism?

  1. Dispensationalism started long before the Devil prompted Loyola to form the Jesuits, long before Loyola was born. Some say it started when Paul penned 2 Timothy (circa 68 AD). However, right division certainly began at least 38 years earlier. See Luke 4:18-19 cf. Isa. 61:1-2. The real Jesuit involvement is in stirring up the very false accusation addressed in this article.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s