Did Saint Peter predict the reformation?

[lumenjesuchrist]

Ok at 2 Peter 2:1-3 it says *1But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there shall be among you lying teachers, who shall bring in sects of perdition, and deny the Lord who bought them: bringing upon themselves swift destruction.
*** 2And many shall follow their riotousnesses, through whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.

*** 3And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you. Whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their perdition slumbereth not.

***Is he describing what was the reformation or just people in general. It seems to me he is describing the reformation, because they were lying teachers who spoke of the Church as evil and corrupt. I would just like to see what you guys have to think. God Bless!

 

[TimothyH]

Peter was a fisherman. Peter was not a prophet. He was not in the buseinss of predicting the future. Prophets in biblical times were very specific people. Many prophets were extremely flamboyant, even to the point of Hosea marrying a harlot to prove a point about Israel’s infidelity. Rabbis taught the Torah law while prophets exhorted the population to live righeously, hence the term “The Law and the Prophets.”

Peter acknowledges both teachers of the law and prophets in the very first verse of 2 Peter 2

There were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you (2 Peter 2:1)

I think Peter was acknowledging that there were false prophets and teachers of false doctrines all through Israel’s history, and that this would not change with the advent of Christ’s Church. He was simply telling Christians to beware of the false prophets and teachers of false doctrine, to not give into their temptations, and that in the end “the Lord knows how to rescue the devout from trial” (2 Peter 2:9).

It’s a mistake to take that verse out of context and apply it to an event 1500 years in the future. That’s what got us the false teaching of salvation by faith alone and the false prohesy of the rapture. We have to try to understand the context under which the authors and their intended audience wrote. “The Law and the Prophets” was what Peter seems to be talking about. That becomes clear when we read the entire book of 2 Peter, understand who he was writing to and about what he was wriging, and have a solid foundation of Old Testament history to which many of the writers, especially Paul, often referenced.

Now, having said that. Peter was certainly correct. And his words have not diminished in importance to us today. False teachers telling us that contraception and masturbration is OK. That a marriage between two men is equal to a marriage between man and woman or that you can get married three or four times and it’s no big deal. Even some mainstream protestant denominations don’t condemn abortion in all cases. They are very seductive doctrines taught by what are effectively false teachers and false prophets.

-Tim-

 

[1ke]

The Church does not interpet Peter’s letters that way.

 

[Tiberius1701]

TimothyH and 1ke are both correct, but it should also be pointed out that St. Peter’s words can just as easily be applied to the false teachers and false prophets of St. Peter’s own time as they can be to our time. And they fit just as well with false doctrines being taught amongst the Jews of his day as with those being taught amongst Christians of the first century. Yes, this warning fits the “Reformation” just as it fits today, but it cannot exclusively be interpretted as referring to the Deformation of the 15th century nor to any singular moment in history.

If you look at the history of the Church, it is undeniable that there have always been rampant heresies in various places. We tend to think of the Deformation because it was the most destructive explosion of heresy in the history of the Church, causing seemingly unending splintering in the Body of Christ for over 500 years and counting, but in the Early Church there was Docetism, Gnosticism, Nicolaitanism, Monarchianism, Unitarianism, Montanism, Arianism, and on and on and on. All these heresies and more surfaced and resurfaced throughout the history of Christendom, and many of the errors of today are merely echoes of those spouted from the beginning by the Father of Lies, so to claim that Peter’s warning applies only, or even primarily, to the Protestant Revolt, is to ignore the ceaseless onslaught of the Devil against the Church of God for the sake of a fixation on one disastrous battle. (Or, to put it another way, it’s a failure to see the forest for a tree.)

There are always battles; some are won by Truth and some by Lies, some by Good and some by Evil, but the Truth of God applies to the entire war, and we know Who will win it!. We may look on the catastrophe of the “Reformation” and on the regretable situation we find ourselves in because of it, saying, in the words of Frodo Baggins, “I wish it need not have happened in my time,” but the Church replies with the same wisdom as voiced by Gandalf the Grey: “So do I, and so do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.” (J.R.R. Tolkien, The Fellowship of the Ring)

You were placed in this time because it is the time in which you are uniquely fitted to become a Saint who’s self-offering to God can work the most benefit for the whole Church. It is up to you to embrace His grace daily and become that Saint so that the whole Body of Christ, working together with each other and our Head, might become more unified, more quickly bringing about the return of Christ and the spreading of the Gospel of Truth to all mankind… or to turn your back on that plan and let the enemy win this round. That is the choice set before each of us…

 

[may_they_be_one]

To what extent can we be allowed to privately interpret 2 Peter?

There is so much there that looks like the prosperity/healing teachers of today, but then again, I’ve known many people (including former Catholics) who’ve been very encouraged in their walk of faith (in Christ) through these non-denominational (many times t.v.) teachers…

But, the Holy Spirit seems to speak to my conscience whenever I hear these teachers saying words of rebuke to the devil/demons, saying things like “let’s step on his head” or “let’s give the devil a whipping” or similar ideas.

This seems to apply to 2Peter 2:10-12 as well as Jude :8, “slandering celestial beings…”. Yet, these teachers/preachers don’t seem to deny Christ (as in Jude :4), in fact they constantly refer to Him in a very sincere way…

If we can make this interpretation, could denying Christ mean they deny His “true” Church?

 

[thistle]

Ok at 2 Peter 2:1-3 it says *1But there were also false prophets among the people, even as there shall be among you lying teachers, who shall bring in sects of perdition, and deny the Lord who bought them: bringing upon themselves swift destruction.
*** 2And many shall follow their riotousnesses, through whom the way of truth shall be evil spoken of.

*** 3And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you. Whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their perdition slumbereth not.

***Is he describing what was the reformation or just people in general. It seems to me he is describing the reformation, because they were lying teachers who spoke of the Church as evil and corrupt. I would just like to see what you guys have to think. God Bless!

D-R Bible, Haydock Commentary:

Ver. 1. Lying teachers among you, some of which were already come, and many more were to follow, who shall bring in sects,[1] (heresies) leading to perdition, and deny the Lord who bought them, denying the divinity of Jesus Christ, our Redeemer; such were the disciples of Simon, and many after them. (Witham) — Sects of perdition; that is, heresies destructive of salvation. (Challoner)

Ver. 2. Many shall follow their luxuries, or lasciviousness, such as are related of the Nicolaites and Gnostics, by reason of whom the way of truth shall be blasphemed, or ill spoken of, by those who made no distinction betwixt true and false Christians. (Witham)

Ver. 3. They shall make merchandise of you, preaching such lying doctrine as might please the people, but through a motive of covetousness, and for their own gain. (Witham)

 

[fhansen]

Jesus also told of false prophets in Matt 7. But a related question could be, was the Reformation the apostasy predicted by Paul in 2 Thess 2?

 

[empther]

From the New American Bible intoduction to the letter of Jude:
usccb.org/bible/scripture.cfm?bk=Jude&ch=

There is so much similarity between Jude and 2 Peter, especially Jude 4–16 and 2 Pt 2:1–18, that there must be a literary relationship between them. Since there is no evidence for the view that both authors borrowed from the same source, it is usually supposed that one of them borrowed from the other. Most scholars believe that Jude is the earlier of the two, principally because he quotes two apocryphal Jewish works, the Assumption of Moses (Jude 9) and the Book of Enoch (Jude 14–15) as part of his structured argument, whereas 2 Peter omits both references. Since there was controversy in the early church about the propriety of citing noncanonical literature that included legendary material, it is more probable that a** later writer** would omit such references than that he would add them.

The letter of Jude begins with him saying that he had meant to write to them about many matters, but the pressing crisis of false teachers forced him to write about that:

This little letter is an urgent note by an author who intended to write more fully about salvation to an unknown group of readers, but who was forced by dangers from false teachers worming their way into the community (Jude 3–4) to dash off a warning against them (Jude 5–16) and to deliver some pressing Christian admonitions (Jude 17–23).

And so, Peter, who is probably the “later writer”, was writing about false teachers in his time, and not predicting the Reformation.