Okay... got it. NO ONE holds to your particular eclectic view. Nor is there any local church that holds to your view. Nor is there any denomination which ascribes to your view. Now, that isn't so hard to spell out, is it?
Quite possibly, as you
now say “my particular
eclectic view” (I think the same would almost certainly be true concerning you as well,
speaking very strictly -but I do acknowledge,
even more true of me).
Every organized construct (including any of the major positions) could be said to have its roots in so many ideas which might be traced to numerous sources, but this does not invalidate a thing, even if it is a thing not being popularly recognized. And I got that you had probably already gotten whatever you were going to get when you first posed your question to me, so I very deliberately answered you according to your foozle. Intentionally I answered you by taking the very wooden sense of your words (“who else would hold to
your particular views of eschatology?”) in order to seize the opportunity to demonstrate various points which undermine what I supposed to be lying at the very bottom of your question, but still I have attempted in my answers to be gentle as a dove (I think sheep beating, or smiting “fellow servants” is a great danger of our day -Mt. 24:49).
I am sorry if you missed my point about what Scripture expressly says concerning so many things being “sealed up” until the time of the end. Naturally we should expect if things are to become apparent at such a time as there is only a tiny remnant, that
very few will understand Dn. 12:8-10; 11:33 (even though people from all different orthodox camps already -for many years- had glimpses of various of these truths).
What I will agree with is that longevity of a view, nor the number of individuals (well-known or otherwise), etc. necessarily is worthy on one's 'imprimatur'. However, God has raised up true men of God who have been gifted in the Scriptures, of which none was nor ever will be infallible in their understanding of the Scriptures, who are worthy of note. And the fact that you cannot name even one is rather sad.
I take it you are speaking of contemporary men, and (insofar as there
is some truth in what you say) I agree it is
very sad, but I mean this differently than you intended it. There are so many gifted men these days in Protestantism who have every bit as much education as the Jesuits (who are such as, when proving serviceable, can preach Christ every bit as good as those mentioned in Mark 3:11), and so, naturally these men are well-equipped and capable of being masters in their craft.
I hope that you will have the extremely difficult blessing of waking up in “church” some day to almost everyone gazing at you in a very bad way with an unseen “mystery” eye in their forehead or hand (their force is not right (Jer. 23)) and all of them very subtly persecuting and hounding you (hopefully no snares will be involved, although, we are told concerning this day (one way or other) that "as a snare shall it come on all them that dwell on the face of the whole earth" Lk. 21:35). This would ween you very quickly off of your trust in so many “true men of God” (God knows whoever really are his, -would that people knew and understood what time it is). And I hope if this happens, that you will be able to weep inconsolably like Rachel weeping when she finds that her children “are not” (Mt. 2:18), and to eat your meat just as Daniel did whenever he fasted and mourned for three full weeks (Dn. 10:1-3), and to feel the same as David and the people of God when their city (Ziklag) was burned with fire (and they “wept, until they had no more power to weep” -1 Sam. 30:3-4). And it is not actually because I wish
trouble upon you, that I say these things. But obviously I am
beside myself, because little horns with eyes (Dn. 7:20-21) and watching leopards (Hos. 13:7) are things of fairy tales, or at most, are elaborate descriptions of various things of history which have
nothing to do with our
present day, when things generally have been so peaceful around the camp of the saints that, if anything, it might be in danger of being destroyed by peace and prosperity. (Ez. 38:7-16, Rev. 20:7-9, Dn. 8:25)
When the sanctuary is so desolated, God is able to raise up poor despised and pathetic people (out of places like carpenter shops and sheep pastures) who will speak the truth which dumb dogs won’t tell (whoever such might be). And so, perhaps we should all remember that some
have been said to have entertained angels
unawares. There are some also, who readily will build monuments and “garnish the tombs” of past men of God, but who will persecute (in one manner or other, even as supposing they do God service) those who actually dare to say what
most needs to be said
in their own day. Mt. 23:29-39.
The "Reformed Faith" is illustrative in that when one compares near all of the "Confessions", "Articles of Faith", "Catechisms", "Canons", et al which flowed out of the Protestant Reformation, what one can incontrovertibly conclude is that despite their unique differences which are biblically/theologically minor, they all embrace the same "Doctrines of Grace". Would you not agree/admit that such a phenomena is more than more than worthy of one's serious attention?
Yes, certainly. I suppose this is because they were afforded a greater measure of the Spirit, and so there was a greater degree of the
unity of the Spirit among them. Today, the fact that “Christianity” is so splintered (just like Israel in days of the original "Antiochus Epiphanes," and as also was the case in the days of Christ’s
first coming) testifies very loudly to a withdrawal of the Spirit (much of the “unity” that does exist is sham unity which comes with indifference, produces worldly "peace," and often is not according to the truth), yet, who will acknowledge this?
“shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with them? I tell you that he will avenge them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?” Lk. 18:7
I do appreciate the content of your point here, though, as I agree with what you said, and am very much in favor of confessional Christianity and the faithful formulation of systematic doctrine. However, when we are speaking concerning those "negotiable"
outworkings of Eschatology, it is an entirely different story than that which concerns such primary things as the Doctrines of Grace (or something like the doctrine of the Trinity, which things concern the essentials of the gospel and salvation), so I think your example is inadequate with reference to our topic.
I had tried to point out previously that the
express testimony of Scripture is that much concerning Eschatology has been “sealed up until the time of the end.” And I think we should not expect to find in books (especially those which actually sell)
much of what is now becoming apparent about the last days, especially when the remnant has become so small it is like two very unpopular witnesses which must be silenced or disenfranchised however possible, including by means of demonic natured attacks from the "beast" (Dn. 8:12,24-25; 11:38-39; Rev. 11:7). The "two witness's" own city is taken by the gentiles (or practical pagans professing to be Christians), and they cannot buy or sell in the ordinary comforts of broader society as well, so what would we expect under such circumstances, -a major, unified understanding of, assertion, and assent to the truth
during the time of an overwhelming flood of apostasy?
Allow me to clarify in closing that none of this is being said in a way intended as a personal attack on you Pilgrim, even though I might seem to be “locking horns” with you a little
on a few things. I do very much appreciate your defense of essential gospel truth as it is being assailed in another post entitled “The Three Covenants,” so I do thank you for that (although I realize you don’t need my thanks or acknowledgement, but I still think it is good to encourage others in what is right, even as I also am encouraged simply to see the gospel being defended).
