Berean Tim
Well-Known Member
I'm I wrong that you don't consider the events in Matthew 24 to have been done in 70AD ? Jesus prophecy's a "falling" away in the Olivet Discourse as does Paul in 2 Thess.Ah, fair enough. Then yes the Apostle does speak of the resurrection of the dead here. And on this I have erred.
But this doesn't address the matter of the abomination that causes desolation, which the Apostle does not mention.
I never claimed that the apostasy he mentions refers to "the Jews". Nor did I identify what the Apostle has said here with the events of the Jewish-Roman War.
What the Apostle means has always been a matter of much speculation. What temple does he mean? Does he mean the Temple that was soon destroyed not many years after he suffered martyrdom in Rome? Or does he mean the Temple of the Church? Not a few of the fathers understood this figure spoken about as a tyrant who would seek to overturn the Church from within. For this reason many of the Reformers identified the papacy of their day as what had been said before, and they do not say this by their own invention, but even the ancient fathers had said that one who comes claiming to be the universal pastor of the Church would be as Antichrist,
"I have however taken care to admonish earnestly the same my brother and fellow bishop that, if he desires to have peace and concord with all, he must refrain from the appellation of a foolish title. As to this, the piety of my lords has charged me in their orders, saying that offense ought not to be engendered among us for the appellation of a frivolous name. But I beseech your imperial Piety to consider that some frivolous things are very harmless, and others exceedingly harmful. Is it not the case that, when Antichrist comes and calls himself God, it will be very frivolous, and yet exceedingly pernicious? If we regard the quantity of the language used, there are but a few syllables; but if the weight of the wrong, there is universal disaster. Now I confidently say that whosoever calls himself, or desires to be called, Universal Priest, is in his elation the precursor of Antichrist, because he proudly puts himself above all others. Nor is it by dissimilar pride that he is led into error; for, as that perverse one wishes to appear as above all men, so whosoever this one is who covets being called sole priest, he extols himself above all other priests. But, since the Truth says, Every one that exalts himself shall be humbled, I know that every kind of elation is the sooner burst as it is the more inflated. Let then your Piety charge those who have fallen into an example of pride not to generate any offense by the appellation of a frivolous name. For I, a sinner, who by the help of God retain humility, need not to be admonished to humility. Now may Almighty God long guard the life of our most serene Lord for the peace of holy Church and the advantage of the Roman republic. For we are sure, that if you live who fear the Lord of heaven, you will allow no proud doings to prevail against the truth." - St. Gregory the Great, To Mauricius Augustus (Registry of Epistles, Book VII, Epistle 33)
Do I believe the modern pope is the Antichrist? Well no. But it's important to understand what has been said in the past and why.
-CryptoLutheran
Rapture is just a Latin word used to translate harpazo (caught up). Paul is using gathering as Jesus used in Matt 24:31 "send his angels to "gather" his Elect (chosen). Whether this "gathering" is to heaven or someplace else we will forever be with Jesus, I'm cool with that.
Paul uses a word that means "holy place" not the usual rendering of Temple. John also uses this word in Revelation 11. IMO it is difficult to understand "taking his seat in the temple" to taking his seat or standing in a person. It would force a symbolic interpretation that's clearly not called for.
Upvote
0