S
- Status
5
504Katrin
Guest
What a great article! 
l think that this passage might not be in line with Catholic teaching:
Christians teach that Jesus knew everything as he was the son of G0d, and not because he was intelligent and a dispassionate observer of events.
Other than that I think it should be in accordance with Christian teachings.
One question though…
Is this
l think that this passage might not be in line with Catholic teaching:
It’s somewhere in the middle of the article.
Christians teach that Jesus knew everything as he was the son of G0d, and not because he was intelligent and a dispassionate observer of events.
Other than that I think it should be in accordance with Christian teachings.
One question though…
Is this
the reason maybe why we Christians say that they’re the new chosen people?
T
TimothyH
Guest
The author isn’t Catholic.
***Who is Ken Collins?
The Rev. Kenneth W. Collins, B.A., M.Div.
I am an ordained minister in the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), which is a member denomination of the Churches Uniting in Christ and Christian Churches Together in the USA. I am the pastor of Garfield Memorial Christian Church in McLean, Virginia, a suburb of Washington, DC.***
disciples.org/
I did scan the article briefly and agree with the premise, that everything in the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24, etc) finds fulfillment in the events surrounding the destruction of the temple in 70 AD, that it is not about the end of the world.
I cannot speak to individual statements in the article as I didn’t read it in detail.
-Tim-
C
Cranch
Guest
In my opinion the article makes assumptions about the meaning of Christ’s words which cannot be justified in order to sidestep the more complex Catholic understanding of the words “Amen I say to you, that this generation shall not pass, till all these things be done.”
This would be contrary to Catholic teaching. For examples see the Fathers (and others) on Matthew 24 here and here.
Also, the OP’s article does not deny that parts of Matthew 24 refer to the end times.
A
AD70
Guest
I think the more important issue is whether or not it would be contrary to the teaching of the Bible.
So what do you think it means when Jesus said, “This generation will not pass away until ALL THESE THINGS come to pass.” ??
C
Cranch
Guest
I recommend reading the Catholic commentary on Matthew 24 found at the two links I provided in my post. You may also find this thread interesting: forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=728531
A
AD70
Guest
Sorry, I prefer dialog. That’s why I subscribed to this forum. Not simply as a reference guide, but as a place for real interaction, and meaningful exchange.
T
teeboy
Guest
Many people are throwing the word Catholic around.
The American Bible Association published a Catholic Bible. It has extra books in the OT which aren’t in the Roman Catholic Bible.
T
teeboy
Guest
Persecutions and regeneration are part of Catholic teaching.
M
mercytruth
Guest
I suppose it depends on the interpretation of prophecy. Oftentimes, prophecy can have a dual time line. Immediate and the last days.
Many of the early church fathers interpreted the ‘abomination of desolation standing in the holy place’ as spoken by Daniel as not a reference to a pagan statue, but as to a human being, that is, to the ant-christ proclaiming to be god.
This was often inferred from the apostle Paul’s writing in 2 Thess. chapter 2. in reference to the ‘man of lawlessness’.
It is interesting that even in Judaism there is a tradition of an anti-christ appearing before the Messiah, he was referred to as the ‘armilus’. The most noteworthy Gaon, Saadiah ben Yosef of the middle ages (prior to the Protestant Reformation) wrote about the ‘armilus’.
jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/1789-armilus
God’s peace be with you
micah
A
AD70
Guest
Remember that the term “man” does not have to have an individual reference. It can also have a corporate reference as well. For instance, the “man” in many of Jesus’ parables actually referred to the nation of Israel as a whole.
"When the unclean spirit has gone out of a MAN, it passes through waterless places seeking rest, but finds none. Then it says, ‘I will return to my house from which I came.’ And when it comes, it finds the house empty, swept, and put in order. Then it goes and brings with it seven other spirits more evil than itself, and they enter and dwell there, and the last state of that MAN is worse than the first. So also will it be with this evil generation.” (Matthew 12:43-45)
I find it interesting that the “man” in this parable is also called “house” by the demon himself - “I will return to my house . . .” What is even more interesting is that Israel is called the “house of Israel.” Therefore the house of Israel became the house of many demons. This is later confirmed in the Book of Revelation where the Jewish people (who reject Christ) are referred to as “the synagogue of Satan” (see Rev. 2:9)!!
For many other reasons, I believe that “the man of sin” is a reference to the Nation of Israel, who was judged of God in the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple in AD70.
M
mercytruth
Guest
I personally avoid relying on my own understanding when interpreting prophetic scriptures.
Other scriptures and eary church fathers are needed to support a theory of understanding. You have given us some scriptures in showing that ‘man’ might be interpreted allegorically as ‘house’. Then from there you conjecture that the ‘house’ of Israel represents the ‘man of sin’, or ‘of lawlessness’ by quoting a scripture from another prophetic book. There may be
validity to this understanding as it applied to the generation of the destruction of the temple in 70 AD, but this prophecy regarding the ‘son of perdition’ was really understood to represent an individual who would arise in the last days.
Justin Martyr, Bishop Irenaeus, Presbyter/Bishop Hippolytus, and Tertullian all wrote of
2 Thess. 2 as describing an individual who would be the antichrist who exalts himself as god, and whom Jesus Christ will wage war with when He returns.
The ancient early apostolic document, The Didache says this:
"For when lawlessness inceases, they shall hate and persecute and betray one another, and then shall appear the world-deceiver as Son of God, and shall do signs and wonders, and the earth shall be delivered into his hands, and he shall do iniquitous things which have never yet come to pass since the beginning. Then shall the creation of men come into the fire of trial, and many shall be made to stumle and shall perish; buth they that endure in their faith shall be saved." (chapter xvi)
So when Jesus Christ says, **“nevertheless will the Son of Man find faith when he comes?”**seems to be a veiled rhetorical warning of these last days when the world will be greatly deceived by one individual known as the ‘antichrist’ by Christians… and also known as ‘armilus’ by some within Judaism… and also known as ‘al-Masīḥ ad-Dajjāl’ by Muslims.
God’s peace be with you
micah
A
AD70
Guest
As you should my friend. This is the very thing I also strive to avoid. But when we interpret Scripture by Scripture, we can find a harmony that is divine rather than human.
What I have found with regards to the “end times” is that the period spoken of in the Bible as “the last days” (or “last times” or “last hour”) is the period between Christ’s birth and the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70.
The early church was living at the end of the Old Covenant age and the beginning of the New Covenant age. This whole period - between the birth of Christ and the destruction of the temple, must be considered as the time of Christ’s First Advent.
In both the Old and New Testament, the promised destruction of Jerusalem is considered to be an aspect of the work of Christ, intimately connected to His work of redemption. His life, death, resurrection, ascension, outpouring of the Spirit, and judgment upon Jerusalem are all parts of His one work of bringing in His Kingdom and creating His new Temple (see, for example, how Daniel 9:24-27 connects the atonement with the destruction of the Temple).
M
mercytruth
Guest
They were apocalyptic times for the Jewish people, which brought forth apocalyptic warnings first from Jesus Christ, then his apostles, and then especially St. John of the Apocalypse. We have the eye witness account of Josephus who recored these tragic times for the nation of Israel.
No other time in Jewish history up to that time could compare unless it was the apocalyptic times of the destruction of the nation of Israel and of the first temple. During that time we have the prophetic writings of three prophets of Israel.
Jeremiah who remained among the inhabitants of Jerusalem during the destruction of the first temple. Ezekiel who was with some of the Jewish exiles in Babylon. Daniel who was in the very court of King Nebuchadnezzar as he brought destruction to Jerusalem and the first Temple.
Importantly, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Daniel were witnesses of the destruction of their nation and of the first temple, but they are also prophets for the coming judgment of the nations in the immediate timeframe of their own era, and also for the last days.
This we can also say for the prophecies of Jesus Christ regarding the destruction of Jerusalem and the second temple, as they were also prophecies for judgment of the nations within the immediate timeframe of his own era, and also for the last days.
The apocalypse of St. John is the sum total of the parts of all the prophets of Israel, with Jesus Christ being the foremost of them all, as it was His Spirit that inspired all the prophets of Israel.
To think that Matthew 24, or the book of Revelation is only speaking of the era of the destruction of Jerusalem and the second Temple and of the church age, would be a grave mistake.
We are about to enter, or are entering the most apocalyptic of all times in human history. If Noah’s flood was catastrophic, if the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah was catastrophic, if the destructions of the first and second temples were catastrophic, if the WWII and the death of milliion of Jews under Hitler, and millions of Christians under Stalin, and the atom bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were all supremely catastrophic for a period of time some 70-80 years ago, what can one say about the last days?
It has been prophesied by all the prophets of Israel, by Jesus Christ and by St. John. If all the major rulers of kingdoms have brought destruction and persecution to the people of Israel and to the world during the past 2600 years, what will the anti-christ bring to the church, to the Jewish people, Jerusalem (including a possible third temple) and to the world in the last days?
Whenever there has been a dramatic shift in the spiritual realm of the human race, there has been an earthly Jerusalem, and an earthly temple at the forefront. They are the earthly power points of the heavenly Jerusalem and the heavenly temple to come.
This is not a time to be selling books and movies about this time. This is a time above all times to be diligent, prayerful, and to be loving God and our neighbor in the faith, hope and love of our Lord Jesus Christ.
God’s peace be with you
micah
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, Srferdave,
In my opinion, most of it is within the boundaries of Catholic teaching.
The one part that I found strange - and definitely not in keeping with Chruch teaching is:
“Jesus knew this in advance, because He was an intelligent and dispassionate observer of current events. It wasn’t so much a prophecy as it was an astute straightforward extrapolation of what was going on. It was clear that Judea was on a dangerous collision course with Rome, and the memory of the Hasmonean victory about a century before blinded the people to the overwhelming superiority of Roman might.”
I submit that Jesus was very intelligent and was usually a dispassionate observer - but, He Is God - and, as God knows all things. Now, the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem probably could be guessed by an intelligent person. Of course, this same intelligent person may have been wondering why the Romans waited so long - and wasted so much money trying to convince the Jews that they were no longer an independent nation. The Third Punic War (149 BC to 146 BC) brought on the total destruction of Carthage - and what the Romans did was well known in the ancient world. Why the Jews mistakenly thought they would be treated differently is probably more cause for wonder. The Romans were rather consistent in their treatment of conquered nations.
Throughout the article, the author identifies Christ as God - so this idea that he had insights into the upcoming destruction of the Temple because He was intelligent, simply do not conform with the rest of the article.
Actually, I think the author is correct about quite a lot in the main thrust of his writing:
1.) The Apostles did not understand much and were taken in by superficial items (e.g., the beauty of the Temple building),
2.) Christ makes a distinction between the destruction of the Temple and His Second Coming
3.) False prophets will arise claiming to know when the end is - and this has happened recently (again) with Harold Camping predicting the end of world: msnbc.msn.com/id/44983933/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/preachers-doomsday-forecast-fizzles-out-again/
4.) ‘Wars and rumors of wars…’ is really ‘business as usual’ for humanity - but, His Cpming will be acknowledged by all - believers and non-believers.
So, except for this one item I mentioned - I do not see anything in the article that is contrary to Catholic teaching.
And, it really should be pointed out that there have been many predictions about the end of the world (Camping may hold the record with three) - and all are in direct disregard to what Christ said - that no man knows. For ‘Bible Alone’ believers this had to come as a shock…I guess… but, it was not the first statement from Christ that was trashed in an effort to give a ‘personal interpretation’ about Scripture.
God bless
In my opinion, most of it is within the boundaries of Catholic teaching.
The one part that I found strange - and definitely not in keeping with Chruch teaching is:
“Jesus knew this in advance, because He was an intelligent and dispassionate observer of current events. It wasn’t so much a prophecy as it was an astute straightforward extrapolation of what was going on. It was clear that Judea was on a dangerous collision course with Rome, and the memory of the Hasmonean victory about a century before blinded the people to the overwhelming superiority of Roman might.”
I submit that Jesus was very intelligent and was usually a dispassionate observer - but, He Is God - and, as God knows all things. Now, the destruction of the Temple and Jerusalem probably could be guessed by an intelligent person. Of course, this same intelligent person may have been wondering why the Romans waited so long - and wasted so much money trying to convince the Jews that they were no longer an independent nation. The Third Punic War (149 BC to 146 BC) brought on the total destruction of Carthage - and what the Romans did was well known in the ancient world. Why the Jews mistakenly thought they would be treated differently is probably more cause for wonder. The Romans were rather consistent in their treatment of conquered nations.
Throughout the article, the author identifies Christ as God - so this idea that he had insights into the upcoming destruction of the Temple because He was intelligent, simply do not conform with the rest of the article.
Actually, I think the author is correct about quite a lot in the main thrust of his writing:
1.) The Apostles did not understand much and were taken in by superficial items (e.g., the beauty of the Temple building),
2.) Christ makes a distinction between the destruction of the Temple and His Second Coming
3.) False prophets will arise claiming to know when the end is - and this has happened recently (again) with Harold Camping predicting the end of world: msnbc.msn.com/id/44983933/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/preachers-doomsday-forecast-fizzles-out-again/
4.) ‘Wars and rumors of wars…’ is really ‘business as usual’ for humanity - but, His Cpming will be acknowledged by all - believers and non-believers.
So, except for this one item I mentioned - I do not see anything in the article that is contrary to Catholic teaching.
And, it really should be pointed out that there have been many predictions about the end of the world (Camping may hold the record with three) - and all are in direct disregard to what Christ said - that no man knows. For ‘Bible Alone’ believers this had to come as a shock…I guess… but, it was not the first statement from Christ that was trashed in an effort to give a ‘personal interpretation’ about Scripture.
God bless
A
AD70
Guest
I disagree. There are clear time-frame references which contextualize all prophetic portions of the New Testament. What do you do with terms such as “near” and “soon” and “shortly” and “at hand” and “quickly.”
And what do you do with statements such as:
“This generation will not pass away until all these things be fulfilled” (Mt. 24:34).
“There are some standing here who will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in his kingdom” (Mt. 16:28), etc.
O
onemangang
Guest
Catholics often have beliefs that encompass both/and.
What you seem to point to, is a Preterist view point.
This is within the living Tradition of the Church, if criteria is met!
As you know there are a myriad of Camps within non-catholic “End Times”
The Catholic Church doesn’t have a Dogmatic stance on some of which may be a concern to you
Generally we are Amillennial, or some have said nunc-mellennial in regards to end times.
Many fall into a kind of “Partial Preterist” camp!
None will fall into a “Full Preterist” camp, being that it goes outside the Deposit of Faith!
From what I gather, you seem to be a preterist of sorts, what kind, I don’t know?
Would you consider yourself a Partial Preterist, or a Full Preterist?
A
AD70
Guest
I believe full preterism is heresy.
I am a “partial” preterist, but I consider myself a “strong” preterist.
My position is that Mt. 24 is fulfilled, and the Book of Revelation chapters 1-19 are also fulfilled. I believe we are currently in the millennium right now - chapter 20.
I consider myself Postmillennial - or Optimistic Amill.
T
tqualey
Guest
Hi, AD70
I think trying to, “…interpret Scripture by Scripture…” leads to genuine chaos and confusion. This is the same thing as say that ‘Scriptue interprets itself’ - equally misguided. And, the proof of that pudding is that there are 30,000+ groups, assemblies, congregations, tabernacles, and fellowships all claiming that they are guided only by Scripture - and they all contradict themselves. The contradiction is so profound - there is not yet one set of ‘Common Beliefs’ that Protestantism can agree upon.
When you apply one verse or chapter or book to interpret another - who else is in agreement with you? Are you using ancient sources - or what others claim to be their interpretation of ancient sources? Seriously, what you are advocating is just what Luther and Calvin were proclaiming when the revolted from the Catholic Church in the 16th Century - and Luther for one (do not know of any documentation on Calvin) was disgusted that, ‘…every milkmaid was interpreting Scripture…’ - and not the way Luther wanted! Nothing has changed in 500 years - except the number of groups that have splintered from the previous splitering groups.
‘Sola Scriptura’ is a dead and baren heresy that continues to draw in members because of the lure that, “… THIS is the Word of God!..and while you do not know how to interpret it - I do!!” And, if you want to put this to the test - just look on line to the various contradictory beliefs as core to the various and competing Protestant organizations. No one can seriously claim that contracdictory interpretations - multiple chaos - are possible with God. Now, there is another spirti who specializes in chaos and confusion and contradiction. Take you pick.
God bless
I think trying to, “…interpret Scripture by Scripture…” leads to genuine chaos and confusion. This is the same thing as say that ‘Scriptue interprets itself’ - equally misguided. And, the proof of that pudding is that there are 30,000+ groups, assemblies, congregations, tabernacles, and fellowships all claiming that they are guided only by Scripture - and they all contradict themselves. The contradiction is so profound - there is not yet one set of ‘Common Beliefs’ that Protestantism can agree upon.
When you apply one verse or chapter or book to interpret another - who else is in agreement with you? Are you using ancient sources - or what others claim to be their interpretation of ancient sources? Seriously, what you are advocating is just what Luther and Calvin were proclaiming when the revolted from the Catholic Church in the 16th Century - and Luther for one (do not know of any documentation on Calvin) was disgusted that, ‘…every milkmaid was interpreting Scripture…’ - and not the way Luther wanted! Nothing has changed in 500 years - except the number of groups that have splintered from the previous splitering groups.
‘Sola Scriptura’ is a dead and baren heresy that continues to draw in members because of the lure that, “… THIS is the Word of God!..and while you do not know how to interpret it - I do!!” And, if you want to put this to the test - just look on line to the various contradictory beliefs as core to the various and competing Protestant organizations. No one can seriously claim that contracdictory interpretations - multiple chaos - are possible with God. Now, there is another spirti who specializes in chaos and confusion and contradiction. Take you pick.
God bless
O
onemangang
Guest
Like I said before, Catholics often have a BOTH/AND view of things!I believe full preterism is heresy.
I am a “partial” preterist, but I consider myself a “strong” preterist.
My position is that Mt. 24 is fulfilled, and the Book of Revelation chapters 1-19 are also fulfilled. I believe we are currently in the millennium right now - chapter 20.
I consider myself Postmillennial - or Optimistic Amill.
The Church would view Full Preterism as Heresy as well, it fundamentally is at odds with the creeds and deposit of Faith entrusted to the Church!
Though the Church has not came out with a dogmatic position of Amill, traditionally Catholic thought is Amill!
usccb.org/bible/matthew/24/
- Status