Eutychus Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 Amillenialism leads to lots of questionable THEOLOGY many of us think. The preponderance of material about the last days is undeniable. For example, the Old Testament to 1,845 allusions to the second coming. Over 17 books deal with this in some form or fashion. In the New Testament there are 318 allusions, statements or passages, contained within 216 chapters and 23 out of the 27 books deal with this topic. Most evangelical and pentecostal churches place a large emphasis on studying these, trying to ascertain the timings and the signs, and then, application to history, current events, and finally to our personal situation. [b]Given the HUGE preponderance of material starting with Genesis 3 and culminating in Revelation/Apocalypse one wonders, and asks.... Out of 2865 paragraphs, the CCC only devotes 3 paragraphs to the endtimes [675-677] Why does the Catholic church short sheet Bible prophesy?[/b] . . . could it really be that the Catholic Church would rather not have their Augustinian amillenialism or Replacement Theology examined? . . . is it because Revelation 17-18 are so unkind to it? ..... and a physical Israel sitting on the ground, for all the world to see, with Jerusalem as the capital city, not ruled by the papacy, make Augustine and his City of God nonsense, that vetted, verified, and began the Catholic Amillenial teachings look like the mistake it really was, and is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jaime Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 [quote]Out of 2865 paragraphs, the CCC only devotes 3 paragraphs to the endtimes [675-677] [/quote] I'll short sheet an answer for you. The Church teaches us how to live properly. If we do that, the end times (whenever that may be) will not be an issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eutychus Posted July 7, 2006 Author Share Posted July 7, 2006 It would seem that the writers of the Gospel and New Testament letters and teachings, would GREATLY disagree with you on that statement, given that 23 of the 27 books deal with this topic. But then, what did they know? They were not guided by the Ordinary Magisterium were they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 I'm really more concerned with my own personal end times and those of my family than the end times of the world. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thy Geekdom Come Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 [quote name='Eutychus' post='1019089' date='Jul 7 2006, 09:25 AM'] Amillenialism leads to lots of questionable THEOLOGY many of us think. The preponderance of material about the last days is undeniable. For example, the Old Testament to 1,845 allusions to the second coming. Over 17 books deal with this in some form or fashion. In the New Testament there are 318 allusions, statements or passages, contained within 216 chapters and 23 out of the 27 books deal with this topic. Most evangelical and pentecostal churches place a large emphasis on studying these, trying to ascertain the timings and the signs, and then, application to history, current events, and finally to our personal situation. [b]Given the HUGE preponderance of material starting with Genesis 3 and culminating in Revelation/Apocalypse one wonders, and asks.... Out of 2865 paragraphs, the CCC only devotes 3 paragraphs to the endtimes [675-677] Why does the Catholic church short sheet Bible prophesy?[/b] . . . could it really be that the Catholic Church would rather not have their Augustinian amillenialism or Replacement Theology examined? . . . is it because Revelation 17-18 are so unkind to it? ..... and a physical Israel sitting on the ground, for all the world to see, with Jerusalem as the capital city, not ruled by the papacy, make Augustine and his City of God nonsense, that vetted, verified, and began the Catholic Amillenial teachings look like the mistake it really was, and is? [/quote] Read Matthew 24:36-51. What does Jesus say? You will know neither the day nor the hour...keep vigil. As hot stuff said, we don't devote ourselves to looking for signs to tell us when the end will come. That is a waste of time, because Jesus said we will not know it. We follow Jesus' command and keep vigil, that is, we stay awake, trying to remain always prepared, so that when the time does come, we will not be found idle. That's the important thing, and that's what Jesus Himself says. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Era Might Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 The Catholic Church has a great tradition of end-times speculation. You might want to read "Trial, Tribulation, and Triumph" by Desmond Birch, which examines in-depth the Church's formal doctrine, and also the many speculations of the Saints. The Church isn't obsessed with the end-times because she obeys the Lord. He told us not to worry about tommorow, because tommorow will take care of itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cmotherofpirl Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 [quote name='Eutychus' post='1019089' date='Jul 7 2006, 09:25 AM'] Amillenialism leads to lots of questionable THEOLOGY many of us think. The preponderance of material about the last days is undeniable. For example, the Old Testament to 1,845 allusions to the second coming. Over 17 books deal with this in some form or fashion. In the New Testament there are 318 allusions, statements or passages, contained within 216 chapters and 23 out of the 27 books deal with this topic. Most evangelical and pentecostal churches place a large emphasis on studying these, trying to ascertain the timings and the signs, and then, application to history, current events, and finally to our personal situation. [b]Given the HUGE preponderance of material starting with Genesis 3 and culminating in Revelation/Apocalypse one wonders, and asks.... Out of 2865 paragraphs, the CCC only devotes 3 paragraphs to the endtimes [675-677] Why does the Catholic church short sheet Bible prophesy?[/b] . . . could it really be that the Catholic Church would rather not have their Augustinian amillenialism or Replacement Theology examined? . . . is it because Revelation 17-18 are so unkind to it? ..... and a physical Israel sitting on the ground, for all the world to see, with Jerusalem as the capital city, not ruled by the papacy, make Augustine and his City of God nonsense, that vetted, verified, and began the Catholic Amillenial teachings look like the mistake it really was, and is? [/quote] I think so many people get trapped into rapture fantasy and endless private bible interpretation. Its certainly easier to fantasize about being "taken away" than deal with trying to be a holy person and seeing Jesus Christ in every one you meet on a daily basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jswranch Posted July 7, 2006 Share Posted July 7, 2006 Something in your post somehow sounds like you think Amillenialists deny the second coming. I hope this is not true. [quote name='Eutychus' post='1019089' date='Jul 7 2006, 07:25 AM']The preponderance of material about the last days is undeniable.[/quote]If this is true, then why didn't anyone see pre-trib until Darby/Scofield came up with it in the 1800's? [quote]For example, the Old Testament to 1,845 allusions to the second coming. Over 17 books deal with [second coming] in some form or fashion.[/quote] Ok, no problem here. [quote]Most evangelical and pentecostal churches place a large emphasis on studying these, trying to ascertain the timings and the signs, and then, application to history, current events, and finally to our personal situation.[/quote]Yes they do. However, they do not agree and their theories seem to get thrown out the door every 20 years or so. Even the most hard core pre-mill will laugh his head off at "The Late Great Planet Earth," today. [url="http://www.catholic.com/library/false_profit.asp"]("TLGPE" was the 1970s end of times rage before before the current money maker, 'Left Behind'.)[/url] [quote]Given the HUGE preponderance of material starting with Genesis 3 and culminating in Revelation/Apocalypse one wonders, and asks.... Out of 2865 paragraphs, the CCC only devotes 3 paragraphs to the endtimes [675-677]?[/quote] Because that is all she needs. How many paragraphs would you like to see in the CCC? If you have a problem with the CCC, cite exactly what it says that you do not like by sentence. [quote] . . . could it really be that the Catholic Church would rather not have their Augustinian amillenialism or Replacement Theology examined?[/quote]Nope. She does not interpret the bible in the same way as you. [quote]. . . is it because Revelation 17-18 are so unkind to it?[/quote]We would say some of the things in Revelations have already occured or are a blueprint of how we are to worship God. Besides, there is nothing in Rev 17-18 to support pre-mil or that the Catholic Church is the Beast/Whore/Babylon. [quote name='Eutychus' post='1019112' date='Jul 7 2006, 07:45 AM'] It would seem that the writers of the Gospel and New Testament letters and teachings, would GREATLY disagree with you on that statement, given that 23 of the 27 books deal with this topic. [/quote] Yes, the new testament greatly deals with the second coming. The fact that Christ will come again is a dogma of our faith. [url="http://www.catholic.com/library/Rapture.asp"]You and I disagree on what the events will look like prior to the end.[/url] For example, I reject all forms of Post-Trib. Re-read Matt:25. The 'rapture' happens after the great tribulation, Matt 25:29. [quote] But then, what did [the apostles] know? They were not guided by the Ordinary Magisterium were they? [/quote] Wow! Sounds like you are a bit hostile. Please note you will attract more flies with honey. Welcome to Phatmass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eutychus Posted August 9, 2006 Author Share Posted August 9, 2006 Since many of us now believe we are seeing prophecy playing out right now over in the Middle East. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mateo el Feo Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 [quote name='Eutychus' post='1019089' date='Jul 7 2006, 09:25 AM']..... and a physical Israel sitting on the ground, for all the world to see, with Jerusalem as the capital city, not ruled by the papacy, make Augustine and his City of God nonsense, that vetted, verified, and began the Catholic Amillenial teachings look like the mistake it really was, and is?[/quote]I didn't understand this bit of text. How do you understand St. Augustine's "City of God"? Do you believe that he was literally referring to the city of Jerusalem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eutychus Posted August 9, 2006 Author Share Posted August 9, 2006 No. He was allegorizing the restoration of Jerusalem into nothingness and substituting in the physical church body, as see in Rome as the replacement of and for whatever passages, promises, and future that the scriptures promised to the Jews and Israel. Amillenialism and replacement theology are the birth mothers of anti semitism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mateo el Feo Posted August 9, 2006 Share Posted August 9, 2006 [quote name='Eutychus' post='1040309' date='Aug 9 2006, 03:29 PM']He was allegorizing the restoration of Jerusalem into nothingness and substituting in the physical church body, as see in Rome as the replacement of and for whatever passages, promises, and future that the scriptures promised to the Jews and Israel.[/quote] I think he was more concerned with the heavenly Jerusalem. This is not a contrasting between heavenly Jerusalem and earthly Jerusalem. It is a contrast between heavenly Jerusalem (sometimes identified as the Church) and the world. Plenty of candidates for a literal "City of Man" have risen far higher than Jerusalem (e.g. Moscow, London, New York, Beijing, Mecca), without having to bring up modern Jerusalem/Israel. The connection you made seems inappropriate. I don't think St. Augustine would have felt his beliefs challenged by a the existence of a modern Jewish state. [quote name='Eutychus' post='1040309' date='Aug 9 2006, 03:29 PM']Amillenialism and replacement theology are the birth mothers of anti semitism.[/quote]You might as well blame St. Paul ([url="http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/romans/romans11.htm#v17"]Romans 11:17-22[/url]) and St. Matthew ([url="http://www.usccb.org/nab/bible/matthew/matthew27.htm#v25"]Matthew 27:25[/url]) for anti-semitism, while you're at it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eutychus Posted August 10, 2006 Author Share Posted August 10, 2006 (edited) [quote] The connection you made seems inappropriate. I don't think St. Augustine would have felt his beliefs challenged by a the existence of a modern Jewish state.[/quote] Israel became a state in 1948. The Vatican refused to recognize that, and believe it or not, even Egypt a muslim enemy state officially recognized Israel before Rome did. Rome only did so in 1993 a full 46 YEARS after Moscow and the USA recognized it. The delay? Historic gross blatant anti-semitism, amillenialism, and preterist theology. You see, God was done with the Jew, they were history, kaput....only problem was, God didn't agree and that little FACT of a restored Jewish state Irael, sitting there on the ground, was deeply embarassing to the Catholic Church which had officially held for almost two thousand years, that IT, not the Jews were now Gods people, and IT not Israel, was the new Jerusalem. God made them look REALLY REALLY dumb. [quote]December 30, 1993 • Finally Israel and the Vatican Agreed. by the Staff or associates of Christian History Institute. © Copyright 1999-2006. All rights reserved. [color="#990000"][b]Zionist leader Theodore Herzl met with Pope Pius X in January 1904 and asked the Roman Church to support Jewish aspirations for a return to their traditional homeland in Israel. The pope was blunt. [u]"The Jews have not recognized our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people."[/u] Pius XPius X squelched any idea of helping the Jews return to Israel.[/b][/color] For practical purposes, that is where matters stood between the Vatican and Israel for 99 years. The United Nations partition of Palestine garnered Vatican approval only because Jerusalem would remain under international control. In 1948, Israel won its independence. Eventually, most of the nations of the world recognized Israel. [u] To the Vatican, however, it seemed that no recognition of the Nation of Israel would be possible unless three issues were resolved: Israel's borders must be solidified; Jerusalem's status must be settled; Catholics living in Arab countries must be protected against backlash from any deal with Israel.[/u] Talks and negotiations got nowhere for many years. The breakthrough came under Pope John Paul II, a pontiff who has reached across many barriers. The fact that Israel was now in possession of Jerusalem and that it had begun negotiations with Palestinians oiled the diplomatic engine. In 1992, the Vatican and Israel agreed to agree. Negotiators set to work to hammer out terms of recognition. They prepared a text in Hebrew and English. On this day, December 30, 1993,the Vatican and Israel signed the Fundamental Agreement Between the Holy See and the State of Israel. Naturally, the church wanted to protect church property and traditional sacred spots. In the most awesome event of history, God became man and walked dusty paths and stony streets in a little mideastern nation. Sacred spots marked the events of his life. The Vatican also wanted to protect the rights of Christians, and its own freedom to teach and train Christians. The articles granted these objectives. Both parties promised to uphold human freedom and the right to worship. Both deplored anti-Semitism. Israel agreed to maintain the "status quo" on places of worship that belonged to the Roman Church. Scholarly exchanges and exchanges of ancient manuscripts were encouraged. The church was allowed to carry on its charitable and moral works and to own property in Israel. Diplomatic ties commenced as soon as the agreement was signed. "Following the entry into force and immediately upon the beginning of the implementation of the present Fundamental Agreement, the Holy See and the State of Israel will establish full diplomatic relations at the level of Apostolic Nunciature, on the part of the Holy See, and Embassy, on the part of the State of Israel." Israel had received the recognition from the Roman Church that it so long desired.[/quote] Edited August 10, 2006 by Eutychus Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Socrates Posted August 10, 2006 Share Posted August 10, 2006 The existence of an Isreali state has no bearing on the Church being the "New Jerusalem." Membership in Christ's Church is what is required for salvation, not membership in the Jewish tribe. The Church is indeed God's People, and is open to all, Jew and Gentile alike. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Akalyte Posted August 10, 2006 Share Posted August 10, 2006 [quote name='hot stuff' post='1019107' date='Jul 7 2006, 08:38 AM'] I'll short sheet an answer for you. The Church teaches us how to live properly. If we do that, the end times (whenever that may be) will not be an issue. [/quote] wow thats the best answer ive ever heard! I'm not being sarcastic..That just makes sense... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now