Early Christians & The End Of The World

  • Thread starter Thread starter Hope1960
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

Hope1960

Guest
In the Bible there are Scriptures indicating that the early Christians, including the Apostles, believed the world would be ending soon, even by the time the first generation of Christians died out.

Well, we’re still here. Does this mean the Bible/Scripture is untrustworthy? Explain, please.
 
This is something I had read years ago which explains this, but I am struggling to find where I read it, although I’m pretty sure it was from a Jewish source.

In Judaism, the term “end of days” makes reference to the Messianic Age. (this is a quote from Wikipedia: End time - Wikipedia)

So, many times in the New Testament where the term is used, the apostles, who were mainly Jewish, just meant that they were living in the days after the Messiah had come, they didn’t necessarily mean it was the end of time or that Jesus’ second coming was imminent.
 
Yeah, I guess it’s something like when I was in Bible study and my teacher, (who, btw is a theologian), said. If I’m remembering this correctly, time is divided into three parts…
The time before Christ; the period of time during Christ and the time after Christ’s death, Resurrection and Pentecost which can last a very, very long time.
When the Bible was talking about the “last days,” it’s talking about the last period of time.
 
They thought or believed in the end of the world at the time. That is in the Bible–“Tribulation”. The fact that they thought it, it hasn’t yet happened, and it is in the Bible is not argument for someone saying that the Bible is not accurate or truthful.
 
Last edited:
I’m sorry, are you saying the Bible is accurate and truthful or not accurate and truthful?
 
I edited my post for you. “Contrary” was poor word choice.
 
What you speak of here is man’s SUBJECTIVE expectations; which are only partially bible grounded; KEEP IN MIND THE BILE WAS NOT FULLY AUTHORED UNTIL THE END OF THE 1ST CENTURY; AND NOT IN BOOK FORM UNTIL THE 4TH CENTURY; AND EVEN THEN COST OF WRITING INSTRUMENTS AND “PAPER” WERE SCARCE AND COSTLY … SO IT WAS QUITE COMMON FOR JUST ONE BOOK OR AN ISOLATED TEACHING TO GAIN [TEMPORARY] MERIT

This belief was not Dogmatically declared,

READ All of Mt chpt 24 [emphasis on verse [34] "Matt.24

[34] Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away till all these things take place." & Mt 25: 13 "[13] Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour.

So their was a great deal of plain-old-speculation being taken for TRUTH, subjectively

Thanks to the HS We Know better now

GBY, Patrick
 
Jesus even said that the Kingdom of God was “at hand.” I wouldn’t say His words were untrustworthy. We have been in the end times for 2,000 years and may continue to be so for many years to come.

I was quite interested to learn what @Autumn-Smoke had to write. Nevertheless, each one of us will probably come to the end of our own days long before Jesus’ second coming so we must each be ready at every moment.
 
My priest said he doesn’t know when the end of the world will be and that no one knows. It could be a very loooooooooong time.
 
Hope1960 said:
In the Bible there are Scriptures indicating that the early Christians, including the Apostles, believed the world would be ending soon, even by the time the first generation of Christians died out.

Well, we’re still here. Does this mean the Bible/Scripture is untrustworthy? Explain, please.
Click to expand...
It’s hard to explain without the specific verses you have in mind.

But, in general, the end in reference was the end of Judaism. When, for example, Jesus says,
“many who are standing will not die til they see the Son of Man coming in His Kingdom”. That is a reference to Jesus Christ coming in the Eucharist. We are living in the Eucharistic Reign of Jesus Christ.

I hope that helps.
 
Maybe they had speculations that it would happen in their time, but there was no definitive. Either way, it doesn’t hurt my faith. Human beings aren’t infallible.
 
Hope1960 said:
What do you mean by “Eucharistic Reign of Jesus Christ?”
Click to expand...
Basically, Christ is King. Christ is with us in the Eucharist.
671 Though already present in his Church, Christ’s reign is nevertheless yet to be fulfilled “with power and great glory” by the King’s return to earth. This reign is still under attack by the evil powers, even though they have been defeated definitively by Christ’s Passover. Until everything is subject to him, “until there be realized new heavens and a new earth in which justice dwells, the pilgrim Church, in her sacraments and institutions, which belong to this present age, carries the mark of this world which will pass, and she herself takes her place among the creatures which groan and travail yet and await the revelation of the sons of God.” That is why Christians pray, above all in the Eucharist, to hasten Christ’s return by saying to him: Marana tha! "Our Lord, come!"
Click to expand...
680 Christ the Lord already reigns through the Church, but all the things of this world are not yet subjected to him. The triumph of Christ’s kingdom will not come about without one last assault by the powers of evil.
Click to expand...
There, in 680, I think it would be equally valid to say that Christ the Lord already reigns through the Church, in the Eucharist.
 
The end times are the age of the church. This began in 70 ad with the siege of Jerusalem. This symbolised the end of the synagogue and the beginning of the church.
 
So, Iike my OP said, the early Christians thought the end of the world would happen soon and didn’t. So how can we trust the Bible when it was wrong about that?
 
Hope1960 said:
So, Iike my OP said, the early Christians thought the end of the world would happen soon and didn’t.
Click to expand...
If some early Christians thought that, they were wrong. The Bible doesn’t say that.
So how can we trust the Bible when it was wrong about that?
Click to expand...
It wasn’t. The New Testament is written according to the Catholic Doctrines which are its foundation. Jesus established a Church, Taught the Church and then the Church wrote the New Testament based on those Teachings.

If you’re having trouble understanding a verse, you ought to reference it and someone can help you.
 
Hope1960 said:
So, Iike my OP said, the early Christians thought the end of the world would happen soon and didn’t. So how can we trust the Bible when it was wrong about that?
Click to expand...
Nope. The Bible would only be “wrong” if the “end” that Jesus was speaking about was the end of the universe as YOU conceive it. There are lots of reasons for thinking that wasn’t the case.

Your understanding of the universe in the material sense of the substance of which it is made is quite different from the Judaic idea from Jesus’ time. To a Jew at that time, the “world” would have been the covenant with man by which God sustained the entire world and without which the world would be entirely meaningless. The Temple in Jerusalem was the centre of the world for the Jewish people of the time.

Now you may think you are being complete or comprehensive in your analysis of what was meant by Jesus, but what you take him to have meant is not necessarily how his Jewish audience would have understood him. Jesus wasn’t talking to you, he was speaking to his disciples and his ancient Jewish audience.

Recall that how we are to understand Scripture according to the Catechism is by beginning with the meaning that the author or speaker was intending to convey by writing or saying what they did. That means anytime we catch ourselves reading our perspective back into the words, we need to understand we are doing eisegesis and not exegesis.

To arrive at the truth of the Gospel we can’t just assume what Jesus meant is what we take him to have meant on a cursory reading. The key to understanding the Gospel is to work hard at really understanding what he did mean. That isn’t always easy. In particular because he spoke in parables and figurative language frequently. Do you understand why he did that? Why didn’t he speak in clear direct language? If you understood that you would begin to get an inkling of the message his cryptic words were meant to convey.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top