I appreciate all the truth coming out in CETF and now Vanguard. I share this as wisely and well as I can.

I just wanted to say one thing, though. I do feel that any one group that is fundamentally Christian should not include in its basis one particular view of Bible prophecy regarding the future, apart from the facts of destinies of believers with Christ and unbelievers in hell. Beyond that, such matters as the millennium are not crucial to salvation.

I happen to believe in the millennium, but I don't insist on all members of my fellowship accepting that. Despite my well-known belief in a literal six-day creation, I don't insist on that either. However, I warn people against accepting any form of evolution, since that isn't based on the Bible (as millennium is), but on human philosophy. It's not even based on the findings of science, because the creation can't be replicated and wasn't observed by any humans living on earth today.

As to millennium, I find the AOG includes it as essential for membership, which is unwise. It's also included unwisely in the last item of Vanguard's belief statement. The scriptures quoted are the ones I accept, but other born again people I know are convinced that they must be taken in context with all Scripture, and point to Matthew 25 etc. on the other side. I don't agree, but their belief isn't eternal-life-threatening.

To go a little further, I found that the anti-kingdom teaching on p.3, col.3 of CETF is according to my view. But I don't accept what's said at the top of p.4. It's not true to say that the `futurist' view covers about a century of Pentecostal doctrine. Actually it seems to have started only with AOG, which had early affinities with `Plymouth' brethren, whose views date from 1830 or so. (But the Pentecostal element only from about 1920.)

The healing power pioneer in Pentecost, FF Bosworth; and Charles Parham, founder of this century's Pentecostalism via Azusa St; Jones and Dan Williams, founders of the UK Apostolic Church; and George Jeffreys, founder of Elim Foursquare; were not futurists on Revelation and were not expecting some future antichrist. Besides this, the following evangelicals were all historicists who believed in a millennium, but not in a future tribulation or a future Jewish or non-religious antichrist: Bunyan, Hus, Ridley, Calvin, Knox, C.H. Spurgeon, Jon. Edwards, Latimer, Tyndale, Finney, Luther, Wesley, Grattan Guinpess, FB. Meyer, Wycliffe, Hudson Taylor, Moody, the Waldenses and Albigenses.

Of course these all accepted that (a) the spirit of antichrist (as in 1 John) is still with us, and (b) the antichrist personality is still in the world, albeit no more like a beast, more like a prostitute, seducing all `Christians' into a great ecumenical morass: him will Christ at His coming quietly zap with the breath of his mouth. I seem to be one of the few remaining millennial historicists in a world which 200 years ago held historicism as the sole Protestant view.

I hope CETF will not continue to preach a future tribulation and antichrist as essentials. Oh yes, I forgot to explain (so much ignorance about the true beliefs of historicists—they're not amils). The Great (ie., Long) Tribulation lasted from about 600 AD to about 1860 AD, a period mentioned by number in Revelation about 5 times. We are now, I believe, in the end times of apostasy. God is still on the throne.

With agape in Christo,

Dr Charles V Taylor

Editorial Response:

Vanguard and CETF are grateful to Dr Taylor for bringing this matter to the attention of our readers. There is no basic disagreement. We agree that our pre-millennial stand is not essential to salvation nor does it preclude an historicist position regarding "Revelation". It's just that in the light of the aggressive Kingdom Now heresy that prevails we think it important to adopt a public doctrinal position in respect of this matter. That way there can be no confusion that our view is that Christ, not man will bring in the Kingdom.
The following is the Statement of Faith in question:

"WE BELIEVE:

In the literal gathering of the saints to be with the Lord, His pre-millennial return in like manner as was His ascension, and the period of the millennium which is yet to come. (I Thess 4:16-17; Acts 1:11; Revelation 20:1-7.)"

It's good to know that Dr Charles himself and all the well known men of God that he has named are seen to support our position regarding the
millennium. There's just one mute point of possible difference or more probably a slight misunderstanding. Our reference in CETF Vol 4.2 page 3 column 3 was not to the "futurist" as opposed to the "historicist" view but rather to the recent Kingdom Now error as taught by men like Rick Godwin and, it would appear, by Caesar Castell-anos, who also clearly embraces the heavy shepherding heresy. This false view presents the idea that we, the Church, by evangelism and Church planting or cell multiplication virtually take over the world and hand it as our gift to Christ. This is crazy nonsense. It's neither biblical nor logical. The fact of the matter is that the spread of "christianity" is not even keeping up with the birth rate.
We honour and respect you Brother Charles Taylor not only because of your well known creationist stance against evolution but also on account of your undoubted ability as a clear thinking Bible student and scholar. It's great to have you as a supporter. How about an article for Vanguard? Thank you.

Philip

Appeared in Volume 4.3 November / December 1998