T
TriuneUnity
Guest
The context for the statement of the Lutheran Confessions on the anti-Christ is not John’s commentary on the subject. It is Paul’s discussion of the man of lawlessness in 2 Thessalonians.
- Status
T
turnorburn
Guest
No need to read to much into it Ronald I was referring to mud slinging is all
P
Peter_J
Guest
Dude, are you anti-mudslinging? Me too!No need to read to much into it Ronald I was referring to mud slinging is all
Small world, huh? (insert small world emoticon)
T
turnorburn
Guest
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
T
terryobrien80
Guest
Bahhh. There have been 264 popes. Which one was the man of lawlessness ?
T
TriuneUnity
Guest
All of them…well, probably not the early popes. They were Ok for the most part
T
terryobrien80
Guest
So you think John Paul II was an antichrist, eh?All of them…well, probably not the early popes. They were Ok for the most part
“The redeemer of man, Jesus Christ, is the center of the universe and of history. To him go my thoughts and my heart in this solemn moment of the world that the Church and the whole family of present-day humanity are now living…"
"…letting myself be guided by unlimited trust in and obedience to the Spirit that Christ promised and sent to his Church. On the night before he suffered he said to his apostles: “It is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Counsellor will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you”. “When the Counsellor comes, whom I shall send to you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, who proceeds from the Father, he will bear witness to me; and you also are witnesses, because you have been with me from the beginning”. "When the Spirit of truth comes, he will guide you into all the truth; for he will not speak on his own authority, but whatever he hears he will speak, and he will declare to you the things that are to come”.
from “Redeemer of Man”, by Pope John Paul II
Link: vatican.va/holy_father/john_paul_ii/encyclicals/documents/hf_jp-ii_enc_04031979_redemptor-hominis_en.html
Yes, a real antichrist. How could I have missed it. <>
T
TriuneUnity
Guest
My response was half-facetious.
To clarify, again… we do not identify the individual holder of the office as the Anti-Christ; rather, we affirm that the office and the doctrines that precede from it to be that which Paul refers to in his letter to the Thessalonians. Positive statements about the nature of Christ by any individual Pope do not change the estimation of the Confessions.
T
TriuneUnity
Guest
For clarification and the forward movement of the thread.
From the website of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod:
John says that there are many antichrists - that is, many who deny that Jesus Christ is God who came in the flesh (1 John 4:2-3). These antichrists are not the same antichrist that Paul spoke about in 2 Thessalonians 2.
Some of the characteristics of the antichrist in 2 Thessalonians 2 that identify the antichrist as the papacy are these:
2 Thessalonians 2:3 he would be associated with a rebellion (a falling away) and he would be the man of lawlessness - the leader of this sinful falling away. = this Antichrist would lead many people away from Christ.
2 Thessalonians 2:9-10 this falling away, led by the lawless one (the rebel) would be the work of Satan, marked by conterfeit (i.e. things that deceive people) miracles of various kinds done with Satan’s power to deceive people so that they refuse to believe the truth that salvation was won for us by Christ and refuse to be saved by faith in him alone = this Antichrist would teach a way of salvation which denies that salvation is by faith alone in Jesus.
2 Thessalonians 2:4 he would exalt himself above everything that is called God and worshipped (i.e. everyone who is to be honored as God’s representative in the family, government, and church) and proclaim himself to be God (cf. the papacy’s claim that the Pope speaking officially speaks the word of God) and that everyone must be subject to the Pope to be saved = this Antichrist would set himself up over all of the God-given representatives and insist that salvation could be had only by accepting his authority.
2 Thessalonians 2:7 the secret power of this lawlessness was already at work at Paul’s time (i.e. the denial of salvation by faith in Jesus alone). 2 Thessalonians 2:6 this lawlessness would be held in check by the word of God until he would be revealed (i.e. he would teach his lawlessness openly as indicated in the comments on vv9-10 and v4 above), 2 Thessalonians 2:8b eventually his stranglehold on the family, government, and church would be broken by the breath of Jesus’ mouth (i.e. the truth of the word of God again being openly proclaimed) - 2 Thessalonians 2:8c and he will be completely destroyed at the time when Jesus comes in splendor at the end of the world = this Antichrist was in its early development already at Paul’s time, he would grow in power until he openly taught his own way of salvation, his power would be broken by God’s word being taught openly again, but his rule over his followers would continue until the end of the world (N.B. this antichrist spans the entire history of the NT time)
2 Thessalonians 2:11-12 God’s judgment on the followers of this lawless man (who accept what this man teaches about the way of salvation) would be to give them over to a delusion that this man was God’s spokesman, a delusion so powerful that they can’t see the lie of this lawless man and reject the truth that God clearly teaches in his word = the followers of this Antichrist would become so blind that, even when they clearly see the truth of God’s word from the Bible, they don’t believe it but choose to follow his wicked, destructive doctrine instead.
The combination of these factors (his leading a large number of believers away from the truth, his denial of the truth of salvation, his claiming the preeminence over all God-given representatives and making the acceptance of his position a qualification for salvation, his existence spanning the whole NT period, the blindness of his ardent followers to the clear words of Scripture about salvation) are fulfilled in one person - the person who serves in the office of the Papacy.
From the website of the Wisconsin Evangelical Lutheran Synod:
John says that there are many antichrists - that is, many who deny that Jesus Christ is God who came in the flesh (1 John 4:2-3). These antichrists are not the same antichrist that Paul spoke about in 2 Thessalonians 2.
Some of the characteristics of the antichrist in 2 Thessalonians 2 that identify the antichrist as the papacy are these:
2 Thessalonians 2:3 he would be associated with a rebellion (a falling away) and he would be the man of lawlessness - the leader of this sinful falling away. = this Antichrist would lead many people away from Christ.
2 Thessalonians 2:9-10 this falling away, led by the lawless one (the rebel) would be the work of Satan, marked by conterfeit (i.e. things that deceive people) miracles of various kinds done with Satan’s power to deceive people so that they refuse to believe the truth that salvation was won for us by Christ and refuse to be saved by faith in him alone = this Antichrist would teach a way of salvation which denies that salvation is by faith alone in Jesus.
2 Thessalonians 2:4 he would exalt himself above everything that is called God and worshipped (i.e. everyone who is to be honored as God’s representative in the family, government, and church) and proclaim himself to be God (cf. the papacy’s claim that the Pope speaking officially speaks the word of God) and that everyone must be subject to the Pope to be saved = this Antichrist would set himself up over all of the God-given representatives and insist that salvation could be had only by accepting his authority.
2 Thessalonians 2:7 the secret power of this lawlessness was already at work at Paul’s time (i.e. the denial of salvation by faith in Jesus alone). 2 Thessalonians 2:6 this lawlessness would be held in check by the word of God until he would be revealed (i.e. he would teach his lawlessness openly as indicated in the comments on vv9-10 and v4 above), 2 Thessalonians 2:8b eventually his stranglehold on the family, government, and church would be broken by the breath of Jesus’ mouth (i.e. the truth of the word of God again being openly proclaimed) - 2 Thessalonians 2:8c and he will be completely destroyed at the time when Jesus comes in splendor at the end of the world = this Antichrist was in its early development already at Paul’s time, he would grow in power until he openly taught his own way of salvation, his power would be broken by God’s word being taught openly again, but his rule over his followers would continue until the end of the world (N.B. this antichrist spans the entire history of the NT time)
2 Thessalonians 2:11-12 God’s judgment on the followers of this lawless man (who accept what this man teaches about the way of salvation) would be to give them over to a delusion that this man was God’s spokesman, a delusion so powerful that they can’t see the lie of this lawless man and reject the truth that God clearly teaches in his word = the followers of this Antichrist would become so blind that, even when they clearly see the truth of God’s word from the Bible, they don’t believe it but choose to follow his wicked, destructive doctrine instead.
The combination of these factors (his leading a large number of believers away from the truth, his denial of the truth of salvation, his claiming the preeminence over all God-given representatives and making the acceptance of his position a qualification for salvation, his existence spanning the whole NT period, the blindness of his ardent followers to the clear words of Scripture about salvation) are fulfilled in one person - the person who serves in the office of the Papacy.
P
Peter_J
Guest
Hmm … no that one’s too small.
What can you show me that’s bigger than a dime, but smaller than a penny?
P
Peter_J
Guest
TriuneUnity,
Regarding #189, I appreciate your honesty, but to be honest myself this seems to me like the sort of thing that hurts your own cause.
Recall that ELCA didn’t just switch from “the papacy is the anti-Christ” to “the papacy is an anti-Christ (along with all other heretics)”, rather they completely dropped the term “anti-Christ” from their descriptions of the papacy.
Doesn’t that suggest something to you, like they wanted to strongly disassociate themselves from the “the papacy is the anti-Christ” rhetoric?
P.S. At the risk of over-editorializing, I think a good name for this thread would be
“The papacy is the anti-Christ” vs. “Lutherans are liars and hypocrites”
To my mind, there’s a sort of moral equivalence between the first kind of rhetoric and the second.
Regarding #189, I appreciate your honesty, but to be honest myself this seems to me like the sort of thing that hurts your own cause.
Recall that ELCA didn’t just switch from “the papacy is the anti-Christ” to “the papacy is an anti-Christ (along with all other heretics)”, rather they completely dropped the term “anti-Christ” from their descriptions of the papacy.
Doesn’t that suggest something to you, like they wanted to strongly disassociate themselves from the “the papacy is the anti-Christ” rhetoric?
P.S. At the risk of over-editorializing, I think a good name for this thread would be
“The papacy is the anti-Christ” vs. “Lutherans are liars and hypocrites”
To my mind, there’s a sort of moral equivalence between the first kind of rhetoric and the second.
T
turnorburn
Guest
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Jesus stirred up controversy everywhere he went, the Old Testament foretold of his coming and what happened? when he arrived it was just as the scriptures predicted, he would be despised and rejected of men. The evidence in the New Testament agreed with his every move, he preformed many a miracle even raising the dead, well if they didn’t believe him then what makes anybody think the world will believe his followers, a servant is not above his master. Are you saved? take this test, when people meet you do they ask what church you belong to, are you Catholic are you Lutheran are you Baptist are you a Protestant? or are you, On No your one of those Jesus freaks! A real honest to goodness born again spirit filled believer will shine as a fire, his/her testimony will rock your boat, scripture reads the Anti-Christ will come out of Rome, many Anti-Christs have paved the way for the coming lawless one, my question is, are you ready to meet the master
Jesus Christ our Lord and savior?
Jesus stirred up controversy everywhere he went, the Old Testament foretold of his coming and what happened? when he arrived it was just as the scriptures predicted, he would be despised and rejected of men. The evidence in the New Testament agreed with his every move, he preformed many a miracle even raising the dead, well if they didn’t believe him then what makes anybody think the world will believe his followers, a servant is not above his master. Are you saved? take this test, when people meet you do they ask what church you belong to, are you Catholic are you Lutheran are you Baptist are you a Protestant? or are you, On No your one of those Jesus freaks! A real honest to goodness born again spirit filled believer will shine as a fire, his/her testimony will rock your boat, scripture reads the Anti-Christ will come out of Rome, many Anti-Christs have paved the way for the coming lawless one, my question is, are you ready to meet the master
Jesus Christ our Lord and savior?
T
TriuneUnity
Guest
How so?
Probably. But that is primarily because the ELCA wishes to dissociate itself from any form of Christian rhetoric. It’s doctrinal positions are anything but orthodox. I take that particular synodical body as seriously as I do the Episcopal Church USA or the Presbyterian Church USA.
P
Peter_J
Guest
I myself would prefer it if the LWF generally, and the ELCA in particular, were a bit less liberal. Nevertheless, I do consider them a pretty major representative of Lutheranism. (BTW, do you assume that the ELCA is uniformly liberal?)
P
Peter_J
Guest
Yes, but you aren’t Jesus. (I like the beehive, though.)
T
turnorburn
Guest
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Must have been something I said
Must have been something I said
T
turnorburn
Guest
That’s funny I don’t recall saying I was http://i171.photobucket.com/albums/u298/hogndog/7.gif
T
TriuneUnity
Guest
Well, individual congregations may be more or less conservative. However, the denomination and its doctrinal standards as a whole must be evaluated in such a situation.
Regardless of my opinions on Rome; Rome is far more orthodox than the ELCA…which I believe may be heading towards eventual apostasy.
P
Peter_J
Guest
Well I don’t recall saying that you said you were. (insert childish taunting emoticon)
BTW, Catholics can use that one too. (I can dig up some examples if you’d like.) Then again, perhaps that approach won’t work too well on you guys: I seem to recall TriuneUnity saying that he like Fr. John Corapi. If so, I have to give credit – I mean, at least he’s not like “We’re too ecumenical towards Catholics, and Catholics aren’t ecumenical enough towards us.”
P
Peter_J
Guest
Anyhow, getting into the specifics of 2 Thessalonians 2, the most obvious problem I see with your ideas is in verse 3,
(In the NASB he’s called “man of lawlessness”, in the KJV “man of sin”. I don’t think it makes much difference.) I’ll certainly grant you that description may have jived back in Luther’s day – there were some pretty bad popes. But at this point it’s generally agreed that the popes of the last few centuries have all been holy men. (The last five – J23, P6, JP1, JP2, and B16 – have also been ecumenical-minded, but that’s beside the point.) Maybe that one of the reasons that the “pope is the anti-Christ” rhetoric is so much less popular nowadays.
Here’s something I agree: with papacy has been around as long as the Church has.
- Status