D
DL82
Guest
The Muratorian Fragment lists the Apocalypse of S. Peter alongside the Apocalypse of S. John (Revelation). Although this didn’t make it into the final canon, we can be pretty sure it’s a good sound document, and has some measure of apostolic authority to it (i.e. it’s not a gnostic text or anything of the sort).
Several passages of this book seem to suggest a view of limited atonement and the elect similar to that found in Calvinism. e.g.
“The providence of God doth not light upon them only that are in the flesh. For example, Peter in the Apocalypse saith that the children born out of due time (abortively) that would have been of the better part (i. e. would have been saved if they had lived) -these are delivered to a care-taking angel, that they may partake of knowledge and obtain the better abode, having suffered what they would have suffered had they been in the body. But the others (i.e. those who would not have been saved, had they lived) shall only obtain salvation, as beings that have been injured and had mercy shown to them, and shall continue without torment, receiving that as a reward.”
“Then shall he command them to enter into the river of fire while the works of every one of them shall stand before them (something is wanting) to every man according to his deeds. As for the elect that have done good, they shall come unto me and not see death by the devouring fire. But the unrighteous the sinners, and the hypocrites shall stand in the depths of darkness that shall not pass away, and their chastisement is the fire, and angels bring forward their sins and prepare for them a place wherein they shall be punished for ever (every one according to his transgression).”
earlychristianwritings.com/text/apocalypsepeter-mrjames.html
Any thoughts? Even if this isn’t a canonical book, and even if parts of it were to be declared heretical (can the words of the first Pope be declared heretical?) we could still assume that it influenced the early Church Fathers.
Saying that God separates the elect from the not-elect among unborn babies based on how they would have turned out had they lived sounds a lot like Calvinism to me.
Several passages of this book seem to suggest a view of limited atonement and the elect similar to that found in Calvinism. e.g.
“The providence of God doth not light upon them only that are in the flesh. For example, Peter in the Apocalypse saith that the children born out of due time (abortively) that would have been of the better part (i. e. would have been saved if they had lived) -these are delivered to a care-taking angel, that they may partake of knowledge and obtain the better abode, having suffered what they would have suffered had they been in the body. But the others (i.e. those who would not have been saved, had they lived) shall only obtain salvation, as beings that have been injured and had mercy shown to them, and shall continue without torment, receiving that as a reward.”
“Then shall he command them to enter into the river of fire while the works of every one of them shall stand before them (something is wanting) to every man according to his deeds. As for the elect that have done good, they shall come unto me and not see death by the devouring fire. But the unrighteous the sinners, and the hypocrites shall stand in the depths of darkness that shall not pass away, and their chastisement is the fire, and angels bring forward their sins and prepare for them a place wherein they shall be punished for ever (every one according to his transgression).”
earlychristianwritings.com/text/apocalypsepeter-mrjames.html
Any thoughts? Even if this isn’t a canonical book, and even if parts of it were to be declared heretical (can the words of the first Pope be declared heretical?) we could still assume that it influenced the early Church Fathers.
Saying that God separates the elect from the not-elect among unborn babies based on how they would have turned out had they lived sounds a lot like Calvinism to me.