Posted on 04/22/2008 6:15:22 AM PDT by xzins
Ping
For your files
No, no, no, this can’t be true! You mean to tell us that the whole hope of the millennium was done away with by this guy, “He interpreted scripture allegorically and showed himself to be a Neo-Pythagorean, and Neo-Platonist. Like Plotinus, he wrote that the soul passes through successive stages of incarnation before eventually reaching God. He imagined even demons being reunited with God. For Origen, God was the First Principle, and Christ, the Logos, was subordinate to him. His views of a hierarchical structure in the Trinity, the temporality of matter, “the fabulous preexistence of souls,” and “the monstrous restoration which follows from it” were declared anathema in the 6th century”.
Say it isn’t so, xzins, say it isn’t so!!
Is this a Protestant Pre-Millenial thread only? If so, I will respect that and not post. I was not able to tell based on the original article you cited.
Thanks
I’d say that Origen is the culprit.
It’s like Peter’s “some will come saying, ‘Where is the promise of His coming...’
Origen was looking for something more substantive than “Wait on the Lord. Wait...”
I did not label it as caucus or devotional, so, by the rules of the Religion Forum, you are free to post.
It’s mostly just data with an opening and closing statement of support for the pre-mil position.
What a coincidence that you referred to this Critical Issues Commentary the same week that I’ve been using it in discussion about whether the early church’s position was traditionally amillienialism!
Sounds like there’s room for debate on that. I’m trying to understand the amil position but there are so many questions I can’t see fitting into the amil. If we’re living in the millenium now, then Satan is bound NOW. At least from deceiving the nations - but it’s hard to think that Iran isn’t deceived.
The re-emergence of the nation of Israel also seems prophetic does it not?
When do the two witnesses lie in the street over which gifts are exchanged?
When does the lion lie down with the lamb? What about the time when it will be considered strange that children die at 100?
Just wondering how so many things fit into an amil position....
The above citations are excellent data for anyone’s files.
At the same time, I don’t want to pretend that I’m neutral. I am a premillennialist, and I do think it is the historic position of the church. Your questions are on target, btw.
Thanks, I appreciate the prompt response. I will state up front, I am presenting the Catholic view, to the best of my ability, and the view I am presenting I think is consistent with the Eastern Orthodox, and most Confessional Protestants (Lutherans, Reformed, Presbyterians, etc)
It is my understanding that the doctrine of the “rapture” was not taught in Traditional Christianity, and was not a doctrinal position of most Protestant Christianity until the 19th century. The “Rapture”, is most commonly associated with “Pre-millennialists Protestants”, since that branch of Protestantism gave the doctrine of the rapture much attention. From my Catholic background, my general understanding of this doctrine is that when Christ returns, all faithful Christians who have died will be raised and transformed into a glorious state, along with the living elect, and then be caught up to be with Christ. The key text, for Pre-millenial Rapture supporters, I think, is St. Paul’s 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17, which states, “For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel’s call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord.”
Rapture-Pre-millennialists hold, as do virtually all Christians (except certain postmillennialists), that the Second Coming will be preceded by a time of great trouble and persecution of God’s people (2 Thess. 2:1-4). I believe this period is often called the tribulation. Now, until the 19th century, all Christian Confessions agreed that the “rapture”, although it was not called by this term at this time, would occur immediately before the Second Coming, at the close of the period of persecution. This position is today called the “post-tribulational” view because it says the rapture will come after the tribulation.
However, in the 1800s, some Protestant Ministers began to claim that the “rapture” would occur before the period of persecution. This position, now known as the “pre-tribulational” view, seemed to be first embraced by John Nelson Darby, an early leader of the Fundamentalist Protestant movement that became known as “Dispensationalism.” Darby’s view of the rapture was then adopted by a man named C.I. Scofield, who taught the rapture in the footnotes of his Scofield Reference Bible, which was widely distributed Protestant Commentary in England and America. Many Protestants who used the Scofield Reference Bible uncritically accepted what its footnotes said and adopted the pre-tribulational view as a major doctrine of their respective Protestant Tradition.
However, No Christian had ever heard of Darby and Scofield’s rapture doctrine in the previous 1800 years of Church history. Shortly thereafter, it seems a third position developed, known as the “mid-tribulational” view, which claims that the rapture will occur during the middle of the tribulation and finally, it now appears that a fourth view developed that claims that there will not be a single rapture where all believers are gathered to Christ, but that there will be a series of mini-raptures that occur at different times with respect to the tribulation.
I think many will agree that this confusion among Protestant Christians has caused much division, even among Protestant Christians, themselves; causing Church’s to split into camps labeling each other as heretical, etc.
So, I have described, I hope accurately, the Protestant Pre-millenial view, and other forms of the Rapture, charity dictates that I should provide a clear and non-polemical vie of the Catholic Church’s position.
From the Catholic perspective, and I would add also the Eastern Orthodox perspective as well as Traditional Confessional Protestants (Lutherans, Reformed, Calvinist, Presbyterians, etc) is that the problem with all of the positions (except the historic, post-tribulation view, which was accepted by all Christians, including non-premillennialists) is that they split the Second Coming of Christ into different events. In the case of the pre-trib view, Christ is thought to have three comings: one when he was born in Bethlehem, one when he returns for the rapture at the tribulation’s beginning, and one at tribulation’s end, when he establishes the millennium. While some of the fathers writings imply a literal millennialism view, none of them agreed on what that meant, and none ever taught a doctrine similar to how the Rapture is taught today. One key Doctrinal point for why I state the Church Fathers did not teach the “rapture” is that none of them ever taught 3 comings of Christ. Origen, as the article linked above notes, clearly taught against the pre-millennial view, and St. Augustine, whose theology would be the bedrock of the Latin/Western Church clearly rejected it. This three-comings view of Christ is foreign to Scripture and Sacred Tradition, as no early Church Father ever taught such a view, nor is this view in any of the early Creeds of the Church (Apostles and Nicene) .
As far as the millennium goes, the Catholic Church agrees with the position of the early Church, as articulated by St. Augustine and, thus, with the a-millennialist view. The Catholic position has thus historically been “a millennial” (as has been the majority Christian position in general, including that of the Protestant Reformers, such as Luther and Calvin), though Catholics do not typically use this term. The Church has rejected the pre-millennial position, sometimes called “millenarianism” For example, in the Catechism of the Catholic Church (paragraph 676), it states:
“The Antichrist’s deception already begins to take shape in the world every time the claim is made to realize within history that messianic hope which can only be realized beyond history through the eschatological judgment. The Church has rejected even modified forms of this falsification of the kingdom to come under the name of millenarianism, especially the “intrinsically perverse” political form of a secular messianism.
So again, the Catholic Church rejects pre-millennialism, which is the historic position of all of the Christian Tradition. Both of the Apostles Creed (2nd century Baptismal Creed of the Church of Rome) and Nicene Creed (325 AD), which is said at every Sunday Catholic Liturgy/Mass, as well as Eastern Orthodox Divine Liturgy, appears to reject pre-millenariansism, stating that Christ will return “to judge the living and the dead,” not to reign on earth for a thousand years and then judge the living and the dead. Since the Church is not pre-millennial, the question of a pre-trib Rapture does not arise, as pre-tribulationism is a variant of pre-millennialism.
Again, although the Catholic Church “does not” use the term rapture, the Church does acknowledge that there will be an event where the elect are gathered to be with Christ. Scripture clearly declares it as St. Paul writes:
“For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a cry of command, with the archangel’s call, and with the sound of the trumpet of God. And the dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are alive, who are left, shall be caught up together with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air; and so we shall always be with the Lord. (1 Thess. 4:16–17)
The point of contention is the timing of this event: The Catholic Church believes it occurs at the Second Coming, not several years before it. This interpretation is entirely consistent with the teaching in the Apostles Creed (circa 200 AD) Nicene Creed (325 AD). This is indicated by Paul’s reference to it taking place when Christ descends from heaven: the Second Coming. Scripture does not envision the Second Coming accomplishing the Rapture, followed by a “Third Coming” inaugurating the eternal order or the Millennium.
I think this is a sensitive point for Rapture-Dispensationalists, who try to overcome the “Third Coming” problem by arguing that the Rapture and the final coming of Jesus are simply “two phases of one coming.” However, this seems to me, and others, as a rationalization. If Jesus comes to die for our sins, goes back to heaven, comes again to rapture his followers, goes back to heaven, and then years later comes again to slay the Antichrist, then that is three comings, not two.
Again, what does the Catholic Church say about the Millennium? It has not authoritatively addressed the issue of a-millennialism and post-millennialism in an Ecumenical Council. Furthermore, the Catholic Church, nor the Eastern Orthodox, do not even use those terms. But it is clear that the Church adheres to what has been the dominant view throughout Christian history—that the Millennium is going on now. It equals or is roughly equal to the Christian age.
Does this mean that the Catholic Church believes that there is no reign of Christ? No. Christ is reigning now, from heaven as the eternal King of Kings. For example, in Catholic Liturgy, the last Sunday of the Liturgical Year, which is the Sunday before the Holy Season of Advent, is referred to as “The Feast of Christ the King”. This feast, in the context of Liturgy, clearly is teaching the faithful that Christ is already reigning. As Chirst told the apostles, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me” (Matt. 28:18). And, discussing the resurrection of the dead, St Paul explains:
“But in fact Christ has been raised from the dead, the first fruits of those who have fallen asleep. For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, so also in Christ shall all be made alive. But each in his own order: Christ the first fruits, then at his coming those who belong to Christ. Then comes the end, when he delivers the kingdom to God the Father after destroying every rule and every authority and power. For he must reign until he has put all his enemies under his feet. The last enemy to be destroyed is death. (1 Cor. 15:20–26, emphasis added)
The destruction of death involves the resurrection of the dead—all of the dead, not just some dead, or death would not have been destroyed. This occurs in Revelation 20:13–14, which is after the Millennium (cf. Rev. 20:1–6).
Thus Christ reigns—along with the saints (cf. Rev. 20:4–6)—in heaven, and this reign is extended on earth through the Church, which is an expression of the mystery of the kingdom of God (cf. Luke 17:20–21) and the pillar and foundation of Truth (1 Tim 3: 15). The Church is described by St. Paul as the body of Christ (1 Cor 12: 12-14), the Bride of Christ (Eph 5: 26-27) and by St. Peter as the People of God (1 Pet 2: 9-10). Since Christ has one Body, and One Bride, and one people, and since God is a God of perfect communion (Holy Trinity), then Christ is not only reigning in Heaven, he is reigning here on earth through his body, the Church. In closing, we are presently living in the golden age of Christ’s reign, because he has become incarnate and revealed the Truths of God to humanity.
I always read, but rarely post on, the eschatology threads.
Although I lean heavily toward the pre-millenial view, I don't consider the topic to be a salvation issue. Pre-mil, post-mil, amil, we are all of the same family - saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.
This Justin Martyr quote (on his apparently pre-mil view) from the article makes me believe he may have felt similarly:
“many who belong to pure and pious faith, and are true Christians, think otherwise.”
I think that people equate dispensationalism with premil. I believe it is possible to be premil and not be dispensational.
It is hard, isn’t it, not to think that people lived under different paradigms in the Garden, before the flood, after the law was given to Moses, after the resurrection.
I’m willing to be persuaded that I’m wrong on the premil but I don’t see how amil hangs together. I’m glad salvation doesn’t hang on a right understanding of this issue.
It’s a good quote by Justin Martyr. I’ve read it myself.
However, there is one caution. There is no place that Justin indicates that the “other view” is amillennialism or preterism or post-millennialism.
In fact, in context one would really think that the “other view” could also be pre-millennial but with some differences in either sequences or locations.
I do think it’s possible to make a strong case for different eras on the earth since its creation and following the return of Christ.
There are different varieties of both premillennialism and dispensationalism.
Premil is not a salvation issue.
Good point. But it still seems, IMO, to suggest that disagreements over the interpretation of biblical prophecy shouldn't necessarily be a cause to doubt anyones salvation or think of them as anything other than brothers and sisters in Christ. (though I'm always of the opinion that each should look to their own salvation and not anyone elses!)
By and large, I’d agree that one’s view of prophecy has no impact on salvation. (I’m sure someone can up with something crazy that we’d both raise our eyebrows at.)
That said, it is significant that the position of the early church was premillennial.
It would certainly indicate to me that that is the place to begin the study.
HISTORY OF THEThis is the same fellow who castrated himself in order to remove worldly
shalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach Adonai
distractions and led to celibacy in the Roman church. "This asceticism, particularly fasting and celibacy, was commended
The Greek philosophical schools led to many errors in the early church.
more or less distinctly by the most eminent ante-Nicene fathers, and was practised, at least partially, by a particular class of Christians
(by Origen even to the unnatural extreme of self-emasculation)."
CHRISTIAN CHURCH
VOL. 3
by Philip Schaff
Origen isn’t sounding like much of a role model is he?
THANKS MUCH.
DID ANYONE LISTEN TO COAST TO COAST LAST NIGHT? Going to the website to see what docs I can post from the guest’s website shortly.
END TIMES PING LIST PING.
Please let me know if you want on or off.
thanks for the ping, xzins
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.