Historicism (Christianity)
In Christian eschatology, historicism is a method of interpretation of biblical prophecies which associates symbols with historical persons, nations or events. The main primary texts of interest to Christian historicists include apocalyptic literature, such as the Book of Daniel and the Book of Revelation. It sees the prophecies of Daniel as being fulfilled throughout history, extending from the past through the present to the future. It is sometimes called the continuous historical view. Commentators have also applied historicist methods to ancient Jewish history, to the Roman Empire, to Islam, to the Papacy, to the Modern era, and to the end time.
The historicist method starts with Daniel 2 and works progressively through consecutive prophecies of the book—chapters 7, 8 and 11—resulting in a view of Daniel's prophecies very different from preterism and futurism.
Almost all Protestant Reformers from the Reformation into the 19th century held historicist views.[1]
Overview[edit]
Historicists believe that prophetic interpretation reveals the entire course of history of the church from the writing of the Book of Daniel, some centuries before the close of the 1st century, to the end of time.[2] Historicist interpretations have been criticized for inconsistencies, conjectures, and speculations and historicist readings of the Book of Revelation have been revised as new events occur and new figures emerge on the world scene.[3]
Historicism was the belief held by the majority of the Protestant Reformers, including Martin Luther, John Calvin, Thomas Cranmer, and John Knox. The Catholic church tried to counter it with preterism and Futurism during the Counter-Reformation.[4][5] This alternate view served to bolster the Catholic Church's position against attacks by Protestants,[6][7] and is viewed as a Catholic defense against the Protestant Historicist view which identified the Roman Catholic Church as a persecuting apostasy and the Pope with the antichrist.[7]
One of the most influential aspects of the Protestant historicist paradigm was the speculation that the Pope could be the antichrist. Martin Luther wrote this view, which was not novel, into the Smalcald Articles of 1537. It was then widely popularized in the 16th century, via sermons and drama, books and broadside publication.[8] Jesuit commentators developed alternate approaches that would later become known as preterism and futurism, and applied them to apocalyptic literature;[9][10] Francisco Ribera[11] developed a form of futurism (1590), and Luis de Alcazar a form of preterism, at the same period.[12][13][14]
The historicist approach has been used in attempts to predict the date of the end of the world. An example in post-Reformation Britain is in the works of Charles Wesley, who predicted that the end of the world would occur in 1794, based on his analysis of the Book of Revelation. Adam Clarke, whose commentary was published in 1831, proposed a possible date of 2015 for the end of the papal power.[15]
In 19th-century America, William Miller proposed that the end of the world would occur on October 22, 1844, based on a historicist model used with Daniel 8:14. Miller's historicist approach to the Book of Daniel spawned a national movement in the United States known as Millerism. After the Great Disappointment some of the Millerites eventually organized the Seventh-day Adventist Church,[16] which continues to maintain a historicist reading of biblical prophecy as essential to its eschatology.[17] Millerites also formed other Adventist bodies, including the one that spawned the Watch Tower movement, better known as Jehovah's Witnesses, who hold to their own unique historicist interpretations of Bible prophecy.[18]
History[edit]
Early interpretations[edit]
Prophetic commentaries in the early church usually interpreted individual passages rather than entire books. The earliest complete commentary on the Book of Revelation was carried out by Victorinus of Pettau, considered to be one of the earliest historicist commentators, around 300 AD.[19][20] . Edward Bishop Elliott, a proponent of the historicist interpretation, wrote that it was modified and developed by the expositions of Andreas, Primasius (both 6th century), Bede (730 AD), Anspert, Arethas, Haimo of Auxerre, and Berengaudus (all of the 9th century).[1]: Appendix I The 10th-century Catholic bishop Arnulf of Orléans was, according to Elliott, the first to apply the Man of Sin prophecy in 2 Thessalonians 2:3–9 to the papacy.[1]: Appendix I [21] Joachim of Floris gave the same interpretation in 1190,[1]: Appendix I and the archbishop Eberhard II, Archbishop of Salzburg|Eberhard II, in 1240.
Joachimitism[edit]
Joachim of Fiore was an early historicist theologian.[22] Joachimites divided history into three overlapping "stages" which each correspond to the persons of the Trinity. The first stage, of the Father, began with Adam, peaking with Abraham, and ending with Jesus. The second stage, of the Son, began with Uzziah, peaked with Zechariah, father of John the Baptist, and was ending around Joachim's time. The third stage, of the Holy Spirit, began with Benedict of Nursia, was peaking around Joachim's time, and would end with the end of history.[23]