Lutherans, Is This True?

[MaryT777]

Are you saying that you are now a Dispensationalist? That you believe in end-times as portrayed in the Left Behind series? That seems to be your interpretation here.

Lutherans here have made it very clear what we believe, and what the Confessions say and mean. So, yes, I believe as every Lutheran does regarding this, that while we do not judge to hearts of individual popes, except to assume that they are good Christian men, we do believe that for the reasons stated at the beginning of the Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope, that the papacy is anti- or opposed to Christ.

But Ufam, I am much more concerned about your apparent drift away from Catholic teaching into Dispensationalism. I strongly encourage you to seek out the counsel of
your priest on this matter. :sad_yes:
And if you are doing so, please stop reading books by Tim LaHaye.



Jon

 

[MaryT777]

Jon–I appreciate your policy of trying to let people of other beliefs speak for themselves. I’m puzzled, though, why you would think some of the Catholic posters on this thread must have been influenced by Dispensationalist beliefs, particularly those of Tim LaHaye?

Looking at the 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia entry online (www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm), it appears that the Catholic belief is that the AntiChrist is a single person, not a system such as the Papacy; a “signal enemy of Christ” who is prophecied to arise in the “Last Days.” Under the heading “In the Pauline epistles”: “St.John urged against the heretics of his time that those who denied the mystery of the Incarnation were faint images of the future great AntiChrist. The latter is described more fully in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, sqq., 7-10.” The LC-MS doctrinal statement that the OP quoted references those same verses. But, if I understand Lutherans correctly, in saying “the very AntiChrist” you are still not referring to a particular person but, as the Cath. Encyclopedia puts it (in describing Lutheran belief), “the system of the Papacy.”

The Encyclopedia appears to say, however, that the Catholic belief is not that the AntiChrist will be a system, but a single future great AntiChrist foreshadowed by lesser types of antichrists–please see all the paragraphs under “AntiChrist in ecclesial language.”

Even while being careful to avoid casting the Catholic Encyclopedia’s terms (such as “Last Days”) in a LaHaye-constructed Dispensationalist mold, I can still see why Catholics would be very troubled by the LC-MS doctrinal statement. I see no reason at all to attribute their concerns to Dispensationalist influence. I understand that you’re saying “the Antichrist” and “the very AntiChrist” to the Lutheran writers do not mean what Catholic posters here think it means; but I want to point out that their different understanding of the the term appears to date back far before any Dispensational or LaHaye influence.

Well said.
The office of the Papacy is not AntiChrist; it does not meet the scriptural defintion as that definition does not include an office but a person.
Mary.

 

[Peter_J]

Jon–I appreciate your policy of trying to let people of other beliefs speak for themselves. I’m puzzled, though, why you would think some of the Catholic posters on this thread must have been influenced by Dispensationalist beliefs, particularly those of Tim LaHaye?

Looking at the 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia entry online (www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm), it appears that the Catholic belief is that the AntiChrist is a single person, not a system such as the Papacy; a “signal enemy of Christ” who is prophecied to arise in the “Last Days.”

Well, calling it “the Catholic belief” is overstating the matter, but I agree with you that it is a popular Catholic view.

I have even heard (I don’t know for certain but perhaps an expert here can confirm or deny this) that that “futurist” view came out of the Counter-Reformation … as a reaction against protestants identifying the Pope as Antichrist!

Under the heading “In the Pauline epistles”: “St.John urged against the heretics of his time that those who denied the mystery of the Incarnation were faint images of the future great AntiChrist. The latter is described more fully in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, sqq., 7-10.” The LC-MS doctrinal statement that the OP quoted references those same verses. But, if I understand Lutherans correctly, in saying “the very AntiChrist” you are still not referring to a particular person but, as the Cath. Encyclopedia puts it (in describing Lutheran belief), “the system of the Papacy.”

The Encyclopedia appears to say, however, that the Catholic belief is not that the AntiChrist will be a system, but a single future great AntiChrist foreshadowed by lesser types of antichrists–please see all the paragraphs under “AntiChrist in ecclesial language.”

Even while being careful to avoid casting the Catholic Encyclopedia’s terms (such as “Last Days”) in a LaHaye-constructed Dispensationalist mold, I can still see why Catholics would be very troubled by the LC-MS doctrinal statement. I see no reason at all to attribute their concerns to Dispensationalist influence. I understand that you’re saying “the Antichrist” and “the very AntiChrist” to the Lutheran writers do not mean what Catholic posters here think it means; but I want to point out that their different understanding of the the term appears to date back far before any Dispensational or LaHaye influence.

Agreed.

 

[Contarini]

At the time, the pope claimed secular power and required communion with him to receive God’s grace - in the fervor of the time I could see why such language was used.

We have to understand that the Pope had Excommunicated these people as marked them for damnation as per two Papal Bulls.

God gave these people the Gospel, and the Bishop of Rome gave them damnation - frankly, I would have acted less unwisely then them.

…

I decided to crack open out Giant Book of Rules and noted with satisfaction that this anti-christ language doesn’t appear in the Augsburg Confession itself *. In rereading, the Augsburg, I’m actually stuck at how level-headed it is - even by modern standards.

• Please correct me if I’m wrong, I very well could be as I skimmed it.

You’re right about the Augsburg Confession. There are political as well as theological reasons for its level-headedness, but the level-headedness is certainly there and ecumenical Christians of all persuasions can be grateful for it. However, if I’m not mistaken, confessional Lutherans regard the Schmalkaldic Articles as binding also.

Certainly the heated condemnations on both sides exacerbated each other, but if I’m not mistaken the reason the Pope is condemned as Antichrist is not “because he’s condemning us” (the early Lutherans were not so frivolously vindictive as that) but “because he rejects the Gospel.”

So the real question is whether in fact Catholic teaching rejects the Gospel in such a manner as to be “Anti-Christian.”

Edwin

 

[ufamtobie]

Are you saying that you are now a Dispensationalist? That you believe in end-times as portrayed in the Left Behind series? That seems to be your interpretation here.

Lutherans here have made it very clear what we believe, and what the Confessions say and mean. So, yes, I believe as every Lutheran does regarding this, that while we do not judge to hearts of individual popes, except to assume that they are good Christian men, we do believe that for the reasons stated at the beginning of the Treatise on the Power and Primacy of the Pope, that the papacy is anti- or opposed to Christ.

But Ufam, I am much more concerned about your apparent drift away from Catholic teaching into Dispensationalism. I strongly encourage you to seek out the counsel of
your priest on this matter. :sad_yes:
And if you are doing so, please stop reading books by Tim LaHaye.



Jon

Johnny, Dispensationalist?

No, I do not believe in the rapture nor the end time series that you have spoke about, however, I see you know them well Well, you can blame Martin Luther for that since he has started a domino effect of those who “LEFT BEHIND” the true faith and have interpret the bible their way, who now many believe in the rapture, or who call the Pope anitchrist, get the picture.

Since I don’t believe in the Left behind movie, I’m sure you have seen, since you have referenced it, I believe it is you that need to seek counsel! .

No worries never heard the name Tim Lahaye, until you mentioned him, Honestly, I had to do some research on that name and found out that he is the author of the left behind series, that you have mentioned above. I see you have read his books, again, another reason for you to seek counsel.

JonNC, quit showing me / us here @ CAF your dirty laundry of the books and movies you have obviously read & seen and perhaps believe. LOL

JonNC, worse than the Left behind series and books, it is you that needs to seek counsel, because you know the truth about the Catholic Churches Teaching and have told me, You “Frankly Reject It” which you “Left Behind” it is You who need to seek God’s Counsel.

I know many here will say they have read the left behind books, and that it don’t mean anything, but lets let God be the Judge of that, why waist time Jon reading such books

Ufam Tobie

 

[batman1973]

Johnny, Dispensationalist?

No, I do not believe in the rapture nor the end time series that you have spoke about, however, I see you know them well Well, you can blame Martin Luther for that since he has started a domino effect of those who “LEFT BEHIND” the true faith and have interpret the bible their way, who now many believe in the rapture, or who call the Pope anitchrist, get the picture.

Since I don’t believe in the Left behind movie, I’m sure you have seen, since you have referenced it, I believe it is you that need to seek counsel! .

No worries never heard the name Tim Lahaye, until you mentioned him, Honestly, I had to do some research on that name and found out that he is the author of the left behind series, that you have mentioned above. I see you have read his books, again, another reason for you to seek counsel.

JonNC, quit showing me / us here @ CAF your dirty laundry of the books and movies you have obviously read & seen and perhaps believe. LOL

JonNC, worse than the Left behind series and books, it is you that needs to seek counsel, because you know the truth about the Catholic Churches Teaching and have told me, You “Frankly Reject It” which you “Left Behind” it is You who need to seek God’s Counsel.

I know many here will say they have read the left behind books, and that it don’t mean anything, but lets let God be the Judge of that, why waist time Jon reading such books

Ufam Tobie

Awww, Ufam needs a hug. :hug3: no need to be a hater chip.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

Johnny, Dispensationalist?

I know many here will say they have read the left behind books, and that it don’t mean anything, but lets let God be the Judge of that, why waist time Jon reading such books

Ufam Tobie

How about you tell us how you really feel?

 

[MaryT777]

Awww, Ufam needs a hug. :hug3: no need to be a hater chip.

A hater chip?
What?
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
:yawn:

 

[Peter_J]

why waist time Jon reading such books

That’s a good question … not only about the Left Behind books but many of the posts on this forum. (No offense.)

 

[JonNC]

Jon–I appreciate your policy of trying to let people of other beliefs speak for themselves. I’m puzzled, though, why you would think some of the Catholic posters on this thread must have been influenced by Dispensationalist beliefs, particularly those of Tim LaHaye?

Looking at the 1911 Catholic Encyclopedia entry online (www.newadvent.org/cathen/01559a.htm), it appears that the Catholic belief is that the AntiChrist is a single person, not a system such as the Papacy; a “signal enemy of Christ” who is prophecied to arise in the “Last Days.” Under the heading “In the Pauline epistles”: “St.John urged against the heretics of his time that those who denied the mystery of the Incarnation were faint images of the future great AntiChrist. The latter is described more fully in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, sqq., 7-10.” The LC-MS doctrinal statement that the OP quoted references those same verses. But, if I understand Lutherans correctly, in saying “the very AntiChrist” you are still not referring to a particular person but, as the Cath. Encyclopedia puts it (in describing Lutheran belief), “the system of the Papacy.”

The Encyclopedia appears to say, however, that the Catholic belief is not that the AntiChrist will be a system, but a single future great AntiChrist foreshadowed by lesser types of antichrists–please see all the paragraphs under “AntiChrist in ecclesial language.”

Even while being careful to avoid casting the Catholic Encyclopedia’s terms (such as “Last Days”) in a LaHaye-constructed Dispensationalist mold, I can still see why Catholics would be very troubled by the LC-MS doctrinal statement. I see no reason at all to attribute their concerns to Dispensationalist influence. I understand that you’re saying “the Antichrist” and “the very AntiChrist” to the Lutheran writers do not mean what Catholic posters here think it means; but I want to point out that their different understanding of the the term appears to date back far before any Dispensational or LaHaye influence.

Goodness. It was tongue-in-cheek. Anyone who reads what Ufam writes could never, ever, come to the conclusion that Ufam Tobie is anything but Catholic.

I am not under the delusion that Ufam is influenced by Tim LaHaye.

Jon

 

[JonNC]

Johnny, Dispensationalist?

No, I do not believe in the rapture nor the end time series that you have spoke about, however, I see you know them well Well, you can blame Martin Luther for that since he has started a domino effect of those who “LEFT BEHIND” the true faith and have interpret the bible their way, who now many believe in the rapture, or who call the Pope anitchrist, get the picture.

Since I don’t believe in the Left behind movie, I’m sure you have seen, since you have referenced it, I believe it is you that need to seek counsel! .

No worries never heard the name Tim Lahaye, until you mentioned him, Honestly, I had to do some research on that name and found out that he is the author of the left behind series, that you have mentioned above. I see you have read his books, again, another reason for you to seek counsel.

JonNC, quit showing me / us here @ CAF your dirty laundry of the books and movies you have obviously read & seen and perhaps believe. LOL

JonNC, worse than the Left behind series and books, it is you that needs to seek counsel, because you know the truth about the Catholic Churches Teaching and have told me, You “Frankly Reject It” which you “Left Behind” it is You who need to seek God’s Counsel.

I know many here will say they have read the left behind books, and that it don’t mean anything, but lets let God be the Judge of that, why waist time Jon reading such books

Ufam Tobie

Ok. Apology in order.

I was speaking tongue-in-cheek, but apparently it did not come across that why. I apologize that my attempt here did not come off as I intended.

I hereby apologize.

Jon

 

[AbideWithMe]

It’s also helpful to understand the revulsion of calling someone an anti-christ comes from modern mythology.

When the LCMS says anti-christ it’s not some sort of 666 Beast of Satan of pop culture. It’s simply stating that some of the teachings are contrary to what Christ has said.

Keep in mind, the phrasing of the Confessions is rather gentle for the time - this was from a time when the Pope excommunicated people - at that point, it was considered (by some) as damnation.

From Decet Romanum Pontificem against Martin Luther and others - “by this means they may escape divine vengeance and any degree of** participation in their damnation**.”

That said, LCMS leaders have met recently with Pope Benedict and he even greeted us kindly in return

blogs.lcms.org/2008/lcms-leaders-attend-ecumenical-meeting-with-pope

By listening. By not hearing what has not been said.

My guess is that you find the word antichrist to be off-putting because of modern connotations. The modern, popular connotations from those stupid “Left Behind” books has nothing at all to do with the biblical terms. So instead of “hearing” revulsion at that meaning, instead try to “listen” to what Lutherans actually mean by the term. As I have explained in my previous post, the label “antichrist” can apply to anyone who obscures the Gospel of Christ. You’ll note that antichrist, in the Lutheran understanding, is a term that can apply to even misguided Lutherans!

Hope that helps.

On the flipside, how are Lutherans supposed to feel when Rome called those who professed our teachings of Grace Alone to be “anathema” - in other words, damned?

Okay, Jon. I was basing my original understanding of your post on these posts from Ben and Steido, as well. My intent was to say that if I were Catholic I’d find the LC-MS statement off-putting if I were viewing it from a traditionally Catholic perspective, and there would be no need to bring in the red herring of supposed Dispensationalist influence.

As it stands, even taking the Lutheran intent of “the Antichrist” statements on good faith, I’m still puzzled why the LC-MS continues to use such a historically and biblically loaded term. The last several “holy Popes” can hardly stand out to any sane person as distinctly opposed to Christ. To be frank, but without meaning to be inflammatory, the LC-MS persistence in using the term seems kind of more like stubbornness than necessity, IMO.

 

[JonNC]

Okay, Jon. I was basing my original understanding of your post on these posts from Ben and Steido, as well. My intent was to say that if I were Catholic I’d find the LC-MS statement off-putting if I were viewing it from a traditionally Catholic perspective, and there would be no need to bring in the red herring of supposed Dispensationalist influence.

As it stands, even taking the Lutheran intent of “the Antichrist” statements on good faith, I’m still puzzled why the LC-MS continues to use such a historically and biblically loaded term. The last several “holy Popes” can hardly stand out to any sane person as distinctly opposed to Christ. To be frank, but without meaning to be inflammatory, the LC-MS persistence in using the term seems kind of more like stubbornness than necessity, IMO.

I’ve said often that I don’t like the term because of the modern usage by some non-Lutherans. Heterodox would suffice, because the basic reasons for the charge are still there - that the papacy claims supremacy over the whole Church, and salvation is dependent on being in communion with it.
And it isn’t just the LCMS, it is all Lutheranism.

Jon

 

[Peter_J]

Goodness. It was tongue-in-cheek. Anyone who reads what Ufam writes could never, ever, come to the conclusion that Ufam Tobie is anything but Catholic.

I am not under the delusion that Ufam is influenced by Tim LaHaye.

Jon

Yes, I was pretty sure that it was tongue-in-cheek. But I nevertheless thought AbideWithMe brought up a good point, about Roman opinions concerning “[the] anti-Christ”.

 

[JonNC]

Yes, I was pretty sure that it was tongue-in-cheek. But I nevertheless thought AbideWithMe brought up a good point, about Roman opinions concerning “[the] anti-Christ”.

You’re probably right.

Jon

 

[AbideWithMe]

Yes, I was pretty sure that it was tongue-in-cheek.

Your post to Ufam Tobie did make me wonder, Jon, what was going on, but then I figured maybe your knees were hurting and you’d gotten into too much beer to dull the pain.

(kidding)

 

[ufamtobie]

Awww, Ufam needs a hug. :hug3: no need to be a hater chip.

Hey there Batman, wheres Robin? lol

Yes, everyone needs a hug from time to time especially men who wear tights and a cape, I believe I know who you will be, for this halloween. lol

All kidding aside, I am no hater, I just tell the truth

Ufam Tobie

 

[ufamtobie]

Ok. Apology in order.

I was speaking tongue-in-cheek, but apparently it did not come across that why. I apologize that my attempt here did not come off as I intended.

I hereby apologize.

Jon

JonNC,

I hear-by absolve you from your sin, go in peace my brother for a different church, lol

Ufam Tobie

 

[batman1973]

Hey there Batman, wheres Robin? lol

Yes, everyone needs a hug from time to time especially men who wear tights and a cape, I believe I know who you will be, for this halloween. lol

All kidding aside, I am no hater, I just tell the truth

Ufam Tobie

Actually. I’m to fat to play Batman. I was thinking either a Viking, or a Puritan witch hunter

 

[ufamtobie]

Ok. Apology in order.

I was speaking tongue-in-cheek, but apparently it did not come across that why. I apologize that my attempt here did not come off as I intended.

I hereby apologize.

Jon

JonNC,

It would be good if the Catholic Church gets an apology form those who wrote LC-MS doctrinal statement.



Ufam Tobie