God is No Respecter of Persons (Acts 10.34) even Isaac Newton
Newton thought it was worth noting that Charlemagne was crowned by the Pope on Christmas Day 800 A.D. as an event that heralded the beginning of the Holy Roman Empire. A historicist will try to change 1260 days in the Bible to 1260 years, but the year-day theory fails. From 800 to 1260 brings us to 2060.
He made this mistake with all kinds of calculations which he seemed to then finally settle on 2060 for the return of Christ, but he was not a Christian, since he rejected Jesus being God. Watchman Nee was an uttermost spiritual Christian, and he had a library of about 3000 Christian books. Even though Newton had about 30 bible versions it is said, his library of 1600 books were mostly scientific books, not spiritual books.
I have read Newton's misapplication of many verses which twist the Bible in bizarre ways. It amounts to dictating certain starting dates and confusing which women are which in Revelation, overassuming all the women are bad, not accounting for Israel, and thinks the Trinity is evil.
He was unable to distinguish the great harlot of religious Rome from the eternal will of God (the woman, Rev. 12). For him, they were one and the same. He made the issue about the Trinity, not religious Rome per se.
He believed that a 1260 years is "the period of deepest apostasy, a time when only a tiny remnant upheld pre-Trinitarian theology. Newton believed he was part of this remnant." I believe Newton is going to hell after he is resurrected from the bad side of hades. In fact, I know it.
This proves well that one who can give us great scientific calculations can be dead wrong overassuming with regard to salvation and eternal life by rejecting God the Father, God the Son and God the Spirit. It really makes one think therefore, Christ won't return this century so as not to fulfill their prophecy or that if He does, what they would be looking for is the Antichrist, not the Christ. Think about it! If this powerful amillennialistic teaching is so convincing, then they are going to use this historicalism, by altering the Word, to agree to the terms of the Antichrist. Christ may even return this century, but it will not be whom they are expecting because they don't believe Christ will return to reign on earth for 1000 years (Rev. 20.2-7). Instead they spiritualize the 1000 years.
Newton's reasoning is faulty, overlooking all the verses in the OT about the coming Messiah who would be the perfect atoning sacrifice. And only one who is perfect would be God for no man is without sin.
It is not ironic that the great harlot of religious Rome (RCC) took hold of amillennialism to deceive the masses. This very false teaching was used by Isaac Newton to reject God's Triune Being. Is that not illogical, to take a false teaching from the false organization to then reject the truth based on that false teaching of historicists? Where did Isaac ever even consider the possibility his year-day theory was NOT true? Isaac said he needed to prove things empirically first before taking a position, but here his faith fails him as he chose to overassume without reading the Bible deeply and with a clean conscience through regeneration by the Holy Spirit by believing Jesus is God. What a glaring contradiction this is to reject the Bible about Jesus being God, but accept its predictive quality.
We must realize Newton was influenced by the RCC and by the times-that is, the world. There were all kinds of dates being predicted by those deceived by amillennialism. It is a plague onto itself produced by the false teachings of historicalism. Were the entire body of believers to be raptured after 1260 years, there would again be no need for us to watch and wait and be prepared. Knowing that the Lord would not come before the end of the 1260 years, we could live evilly up to one thousand two-hundred fifty-nine years. Yet such a concept violates the very principle of the Scriptures.
In taking the historical view of interpretation, an historicist regards that part of Revelation up to chapter 17 as having already been fulfilled, with only the part from chapter 17 onward waiting to be fulfilled. (This is exactly opposite to the futuristic view taken by the first school of interpretation which deems only chapters 1-3 as having already been fulfilled, with the rest remaining to be so). If the book of Revelation only records primarily things of the past, then how can the average child of God ever understand it? It would require doctors of philosophy and learned historians to comprehend it! Furthermore, it would no longer be revelation either!
Revelation 1 says, "Blessed is he that readeth, and they that hear the words of the prophecy, and keep the things that are written therein: for the time is at hand" (v.3). This is the only book of the Bible that opens with this special blessing.
Can we see the puffiness and headiness of Isaac Newton here that lead to his mistaken beliefs?
