Jump to content


Photo

2 Thessalonians 2:3-9


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 01:15 PM

Firstly, a review of prophetic commentaries on the passage.

DATE (AD)

NAME

MAN OF SIN

FALLING AWAY

TEMPLE OF GOD

THAT WHICH RESTRAINS

180

Irenaeus

Apostate Christian

Christian apostasy

Jewish Temple

Roman Empire

185

Tertullian

Apostate Christian

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

200

Hippolytus

Apostate Christian

Christian apostasy

Jewish Temple

Roman Empire

300

Victorinus

Apostate Christian

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

306-373

Ephraem

Apostate Christian

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

315-386

Cyril

Apostate Christian

Christian apostasy

Jewish Temple

Roman Empire

389

Chrysotom

Apostate Christian

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

340-397

Ambrose

Apostate Christian

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

340-420

Jerome

Professedly a Jew

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

354-430

Augustine

Apostate Christian

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

393-457

Theodoretus

Apostate Christian

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

438-533

Remigius

Unavailable

Unavailable

Unavailable

Roman Empire

500’s

Primasius

A single apostate

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

520

Andreas

A single apostate

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

c. 950

Adso

A single apostate

Christian apostasy

Undecided

Roman Empire

1070

Theophylact

Apostate Christian

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

991

Arnulf

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1033-1109

Anselm

A single apostate

Christian apostasy

Jewish Temple

Roman Empire

1240

Eberhard II

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1224-1274

Thomas Aquinas

A single apostate

Christian apostasy

Jewish Temple

Roman Empire


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#2 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 01:20 PM

1522

Martin Luther

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1559

Calvin

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1547

John Knox

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1543

Philip Melanchthon

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1550

William Tyndale

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1553

Hugh Latimer

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1554

Nicholas Ridley

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1562

John Jewell

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1582

Thomas Cranmer

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1587

John Foxe

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Unavailable

1590

Francisco Ribera

A single apostate

Christian apostasy

Jewish Temple

Unavailable

1593

Robert Bellarmine

A single apostate

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Unavailable

1599

Geneva Bible

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1605

Thomas Brightman

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1604

Thomas Malvenda

A single apostate

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1610

Andrew Willet

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1657

James Durham

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1664

Francis Turretin

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1676

Henry of Meath

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1685

Thomas Manton

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1685

Matthew Poole

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1700’s

Adam Clarke

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#3 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 01:22 PM

1701

Robert Fleming

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1712

Matthew Henry

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1727

Sir Isaac Newton

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1748

John Gill

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1754

Thomas Newton

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1800’s

Family NT Notes

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1806

George Faber

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1806

Pere Lambert

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Unavailable

1807

William Burkitt

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1831

Alexander Keith

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1831

Adam Clarke

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1851

Albert Barnes

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1862

Edward Elliott

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1863

Uriah Smith

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1881

B W Johnson

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1888

Grattan Guinness

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1891

People’s NT Notes

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire

1914

Christopher Wordsworth

Papacy

Christian apostasy

Christian Church

Roman Empire


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#4 Adanac

Adanac

    Omega

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 14,886 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 02:17 PM

Nice table form Fort, and congratulations on reaching 5 figures.

I have some stuff on 2 Thess 2 showing how much it connects with Revelation. Do you want it? Actually you've probably figured it out for yourself.
Housework has been a snap since I realized... "Hey! I'm a guy!".

#5 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:15 PM

In this highly significant passage, the apostle Paul warns the ecclesia of a dangerous apostasy which will inevitably arise. This apostasy will be general, it will be dominant, and it will be headed by a man called by Paul ‘the man of sin’.

The description given by Paul of this ‘man of sin’ follows:

• An apostate (verse 3)

• A man of sin (verse 3)

• Will oppose and exalt himself above God (verse 4)

• Will lay claim to Divine authority (verse 4)

• Part of a lawless apostasy which already exists (verses 4-6)

• Restrained from being revealed in power until a later time (verse 5)

• Not in power until that which restrains is taken away (verses 6-7)

• Will be destroyed by Christ at his Second Advent (verse 8)

Placing this passage beside two similar passages (Daniel 7 and Revelation 13), provides an identical picture of this apostasy and its head:

• A religious power with temporal authority

(Daniel 7:25, Revelation 13:5-6)

• Blasphemes against God and demands worship

(Revelation 13:4-6, 15)

• Has power to persecute the people of God for a certain time

(Daniel 7:25, Revelation 13:7)

• Has power over nations and peoples all through the world

(Revelation 13:7)

• Kills all those who oppose it or who refuse to submit to it

(Revelation 13:15)

• Prevents those who do not obey it from buying or selling

(Revelation 13:17)

The characteristics of this apostasy, and its ‘man of sin’, are clear – but what of the interpretation? Is it similarly clear?
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#6 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:15 PM

Notes On the Earliest Commentaries

The exposition of this passage given repeatedly from the end of the second century to the start of the fifth, is noteworthy for its consistency and accuracy. Certain inaccuracies are naturally to be expected of any interpretation of the passage so far ahead of the event - what is more noteworthy is that the exposition came as close to the truth as it did.

Although these commentators believed that the man of sin would be a single individual, rather than a dynasty of me filling one particular office, and whilst most of them believed that the empire would be divided among exactly ten rulers, or into precisely ten kingdoms, their understanding of the bulk of the passage was completely correct.
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#7 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:16 PM

Notes On the Fulfillment

The fulfillment of this passage should be manifest to all. Subsequent to the fall of Rome in 476, the weakening power of the emperors, and the gradual elevation of the Church and Bishop of Rome, gave rise to a new power within the empire, an apostate Christian dictator who wielded state authority - the papacy.

Incredible as it may seem, this passage was first applied directly to the papacy centuries before the Reformation - over 500 years prior, in fact - and was applied by no less authority than a Roman Catholic Archbishop, Arnulf of Orleans, in 991.

Nor was he a lone voice, for this same application was made also by the Roman Catholic Abbot Joachim De Fiore, of the Franciscan order of monks, in 1190, and again by the Roman Catholic Bishop Eberhard II of Salzburg in 1240.

Perhaps it may be objected that these men did not identify the office of the papacy as the man of sin as such, but merely stated that if the encumbent of the office was not a holy man, but a man of vice and arrogance, then he was to be understood as the 'man of sin' spoken of by Paul.

Even if this were so, it is unavoidable that every pontiff without fail has fulfilled dramatically and obviously the very letter of the prophecy. Which of them has not blasphemed openly? Which of them has not committed the most hideous abominations? Which of them has not made war on the servants of God? Which of them has not enacted laws, changed times and seasons, bound men to believe the most wanton heresy on pain of death, or claimed to be the head and leader of every Christian on earth, not to mention the visible representative of God, and the vice-regent of Christ himself?
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#8 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:17 PM

To suggest that there has ever been an encumbent of the office who has not embodied the character of the man of sin, and fulfilled the passage completely, is to beggar belief.

Indeed, it is clear that both Arnulf and Eberhard make precisely this point, for both mention the corruption of the office as having preceded their own day, and been continued for years since - Eberhard insisted that the foundations of the apostacy had been laid by the papacy centuries before the pope contemporary with himself.

The identification of the man of sin is one of the strongest arguments in favour of the Historicist understanding of prophecy, for any interpretation of the passage which identifies the papacy as the fulfillment of the prophecy is necessarily Historicist in nature.

Once the papacy has been acknowledged to be the man of sin, then both the little horn of the fourth beast in Daniel 7, and the mouth of the sea beast in Revelation 13 must be identified likewise, since the description given in these places is identical to the description of the man of sin. This is an interpretation which leads inexorably to a Historicist interpretation of both Daniel and Revelation.
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#9 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:18 PM

The challenge to those who deny the application of this passage to the papacy is considerable:

· If the man of sin is to be identified by the character depicted by Paul in 2 Thessalonians, by Daniel in chapter 7 of his prophecy and by John in chapter 13 of the Revelation, then how can it be argued that no man or dynasty of men has yet arisen who has met the character and taken the actions here described?

· How can it be denied that the papacy has fulfilled this passage to the letter?

· How can it be argued that a single individual (either past or future), either has fulfilled, or shall fulfill, this pasage within the space of a mere three and a half years?

· How can such an interpretation possibly be compared to the fulfillment of the passage by the papacy over 1500 years?

· What alternative explanation of the passage can be given which is consistent with the co-texts (Daniel 7 and Revelation 13), and which also explains why the papacy is not to be considered as the fulfillment of these prophecies?

· What is 'that which restrains', and how does it prevent the manifestation of the 'man of sin'?

· If the 'man of sin' mentioned by Paul comprises a 'mystery of iniquity' which already existed in the first century, but is destroyed by Christ, then how can it be avoided that this 'man of sin' must represent a continuum of apostate leadership from the time of the first century to the time of Christ's return?

Most Futurists insist that this man of sin will be a Christian apostate who will blaspheme God, commit outrages and persecution on the servants of God, elevate himself above all other Christians, corrupt the true Christian worship, seek to bring all Christians under his feet, and wield state authority. When such a man appears, they say, he is to be identified as the man of sin.

But such a man has already appeared - indeed, an entire succession of them - and it is therefore the responsibility of the Futurist to explain in what way the papacy has been deficient in fulfilling this passage.
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#10 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:21 PM

185: Irenaeus:

‘…let them await, in the first place, the division of the kingdom into ten; then, in the next place, when these kings are reigning, and beginning to set their affairs in order, and advance their kingdom, to acknowledge that he who shall come claiming the kingdom for himself…‘ Irenaeus, 'Against Heresies' Book III, Chapter 30, Sections 2-3, 185 AD

‘And again, in the Second to the Thessalonians, speaking of Antichrist, he says, "And then shall that wicked be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus Christ shall slay with the Spirit of His mouth…”’

Irenaeus, 'Against Heresies' Book III, chapter 7, section 2, 185 AD


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#11 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:22 PM

Tertullian, ‘On the Resurrection of the Flesh’, chapter 34, 190 AD

200:

Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#12 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:23 PM

Hippolytus:

‘…the other little horn that grows up among them meant the Antichrist in their midst; the stone that smites the earth and brings judgment upon the world was Christ.’

Hippolytus, ‘Treatise on Christ and Antichrist’, paragraph 28, 200 AD It is to the fourth kingdom, of which we have already spoken, that he here refers: that kingdom, than which no greater kingdom of like nature has arisen upon the earth; from which also ten horns are to spring, and to be apportioned among ten crowns. And amid these another little horn shall rise, which is that of Antichrist.’ Hippolytus, ‘Scholia on Daniel’, chapter 7, section 19, 200 AD


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#13 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:24 PM

315-386: Cyril:

’Moreover, the Antichrist was prophesied to come when the times of the Roman empire have been completed

But this aforesaid Antichrist is to come when the times of the Roman empire shall have been fulfilled, and the end of the world is now drawing near.

There shall rise up together ten kings of the Romans, reigning in different parts perhaps, but all about the same time; and after these an eleventh, the Antichrist, who by his magical craft shall seize upon the Roman power...’

Cyril, ‘Catechetical Lecture 15’, paragraphs 9,12, 315-386 AD


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#14 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:27 PM

389: Chrysotom:

‘One may first naturally inquire what is that which withholdeth, and after that would know why Paul expresses this so obscurely… ‘he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.’ That is, when the Roman empire is taken out of the way, then he shall come; and naturally, for as long as the fear of this empire lasts, no one will readily exalt himself; but when that is dissolved, he will attack the anarchy, and endeavor to seize upon the government both of men and of God.’

John Chrysotom, ‘Homilies on Second Thessalonians II 6-9, 389 AD


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#15 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:28 PM

340-20: Jerome:

’But what am I doing? Whilst I talk about the cargo, the vessel itself founders. He that letteth is taken out of the way, and yet we do not realize that Antichrist is near. Yes, Antichrist is near whom the Lord Jesus Christ 'shall consume with the spirit of his mouth'.’ Jerome, ‘Letter to Ageruchia’, paragraphs 16, 17, 340-420 AD

‘My mind is refreshed, and for the present forgets the woeful calamities that this last age labours with, groaning and travailing in pain, till he who hinders, be taken out of the way, and the feet of the iron statue be broken to pieces by reason of the brittleness of the clayey toes.’ Jerome, ‘Commentary on Ezekiel’, book 8, preface, 320 - 420 AD

Let us therefore affirm, agreeably to the concurrent judgment of all ecclesiastical writers, that in the consummation of the world, when the Roman Empire is to be destroyed, there shall arise ten kings, who shall share the Roman world among themselves, and that an eleventh king (the little horn in Dan. vii.) shall arise, who shall subdue three of those ten kings…’ Jerome, ‘Commentary on Daniel’, chapter 7 section 20, 320 - 420 AD

‘”that which restrains” - is the Roman empire. For unless it shall have been destroyed and taken out of the midst - according to the Prophet Daniel, Anti-Christ will not come before that.’ Jerome, ‘Commentary on Jeremiah’, chapter 5 section 25, 320 - 420 AD


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#16 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:29 PM

340-397: Ambrose, Hiero:

‘Ambrose, on II Thess. 2, said, "And then the evil one will be revealed; the Apostle says that Antichrist would appear after the fading of the Roman empire."

Hiero [Jerome] to Algasi (Argument 111) so expresses it: "Only when the Roman empire leaves, which now exercises dominion over all peoples, when it is out of the way, indeed then Antichrist will come," which he confirms in Jeremiah, chapter 25.

Francis Turretin, ‘The 7th Disputation - Whether It Can Be Proven The Pope of Rome is AntiChrist’, chapter 12, 1664


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#17 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:30 PM

354-430: Augustine:

‘Augustine (City of God, book 20, chapter 19), although he confesses he does not know what it is which has held sway, yet those words, He who holds sway, let him hold sway, he believes can be rightly interpreted as signifying the Roman empire, "as if it were said, he who rules, let him rule until he is out of the way, that is, taken out of the way, and then will be revealed the evil one whom no one doubts signifies Antichrist.“’

Francis Turretin, ‘The 7th Disputation - Whether It Can Be Proven The Pope of Rome is AntiChrist’, chapter 12, 1664


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#18 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:31 PM

393-457: Thedoretus:

What the Apostle calls the Temple of God are the churches in which this impious wretch will occupy the first rank, the first place, striving to get himself accepted as God.’

Theodoretus, note on 2 Thessalonians 2, chapter 2, 393-457


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#19 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:32 PM

991: Arnulf:

‘Looking at the actual state of the papacy, what do we behold? John [XII] called Octavian, wallowing in the sty of filthy concupiscence, conspiring against the sovereign whom he had himself recently crowned; then Leo [VIII] the neophyte, chased from the city by this Octavian; and that monster himself, after the commission of many murders and cruelties, dying by the hand of an assassin. …

‘If, holy fathers, we be bound to weigh in the balance the lives, the morals, and the attainments of the meanest candidate for the sacerdotal office, how much more ought we to look to the fitness of him who aspires to be the lord and master of all priests!’ Arnulf, Bishop of Orleans, speech at the Gallican Synod, Council of Rheims, 991

‘Yet how would it fare with us, if it should happen that the man the most deficient in all these virtues, one so abject as not to be worthy of the lowest place among the priesthood, should be chosen to fill the highest place of all? What would you say of such a one, when you behold him sitting upon the throne glittering in purple and gold? Must he not be the “Antichrist, sitting in the temple of God, and showing himself as God?’’ Verily such a one lacketh both wisdom and charity; he standeth in the temple as an image, as an idol, from which as from dead marble you would seek counsel.’ Arnulf, Bishop of Orleans, speech at the Gallican Synod, Council of Rheims, 991


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#20 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:32 PM

1033-1109: Anselm and others:

’Sedulius on II Thess. 2, "He who as king of the Romans holds the rule, let him hold his own rule until he is out of the way, that is, until the kingdom which he now holds is taken out of the way. This will occur before the Antichrist is revealed.”

Anselm, Glossa Interlinearis, Lyranus, Thomas [Aquinas], and not a few of our other adversaries acknowledge the same thing.’

Francis Turretin, ‘The 7th Disputation - Whether It Can Be Proven The Pope of Rome is AntiChrist’, chapter 12, 1664


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#21 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:33 PM

1240: Eberhard II:

‘With the greatest effort, Jesus also admonished that we avoid false Christs, false prophets who, clothed in sheep skin with the name of Christian and a Pontifical title, desire to rule and deceive us. It is fitting they be recognized by their thorny works, especially avarice, debauchery, strife, hatred, envy, wars, the desire to have dominion, and blind ambition. Can there be a more obvious meaning to these words which our heavenly Emperor prophesies? He can only be pointing to the Pharisees and Scribes of Babylon who, under the title of Supreme Pontiff, we discern, unless we are blind, a most savage wolf whose skin feels as the skin of a Shepherd.’ Eberhard II, Archbishop of Salzburg, speech at Council of Ratisbon, 1240

One hundred and seventy years earlier, Hildebrand [Pope from 1073-1086] first laid the foundations of the rule of Antichrist, under the peaceful appearance of religion, but, in reality, was the first to inaugurate this nefarious war which has been faithfully continued by his successors…

He who is the servant of servants desires to be Lord of Lords, as if he were God; he despises holy assemblies and the councils of the brethren, nay, rather of his own Lords…’ Eberhard II, Archbishop of Salzburg, speech at Council of Ratisbon, 1240

 ….He speaks great things as if he were God and is ever scheming and plotting in his heart how to strengthen his rule. To this end he changes laws, he enacts his own, he corrupts, he plunders, he defrauds, he kills; that morally depraved man whom they are accustomed to call the Antichrist, upon whose forehead is written the name of contempt, I am God, I cannot err; he sits in the temple of God and his domain is far and wide.’ Eberhard II, Archbishop of Salzburg, speech at Council of Ratisbon, 1240


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#22 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:34 PM

1599: Geneva Bible:

2:7 {6} For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: {7} only he who now {h} letteth [will let], until he be taken out of the way.

(6) Even in the apostles time the first foundations of the apostolic seat were laid, but yet so that they deceived men.

(7) He foretells that when the empire of Rome is taken away, the seat that falls away from God will succeed and hold its place, as the old writers, Tertullian, Chrysostom, and Jerome explain and interpret it. (h) He who is now in authority and rules all, that is, the Roman Empire.’ Geneva Bible, note on 2 Thessalonians 2:7, 1599


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#23 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:34 PM

1676: Henry of Meath:

The Temple of God in the Text is interpreted the Christian Church, by the Fathers St. Augustin, Chrysostom, Hierome, Hilary, Theophylact, Theodoret, and others; also by Thomas Aquinas and others of the Schoolmen.’


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#24 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:36 PM

17th century: Bellarmine, Malvenda, Suarez:

‘Bellarmine (1.iii., Of the Roman Pontiff, chap.2) says, "The Greek interpreters and Augustine are in complete agreement in their teaching that, according to Paul, the Antichrist himself is able to be recognized by apostasy." So also do Suárez, Malvenda, and other of our adversaries agree. Therefore, the trait of rebelliousness is understood as being a singular and notable characteristic of the Antichrist.’ Francis Turretin, ‘The 7th Disputation - Whether It Can Be Proven The Pope of Rome is AntiChrist’, chapter 16, 1664


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#25 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:37 PM

‘Malvenda, who writes expressly on the subject… states as the opinion of Ribera, Gaspar Melus, Viegas, Suarez, Bellarmine, and Bosius that Rome shall apostasize from the faith.’ Cardinal Manning, ‘The Present Crisis of the Holy See, Tested By Prophecy’, 1861


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#26 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:37 PM

1664: Francis Turretin:

‘The Pontiffs would have us believe it is a political apostasy from the Roman empire referred to here. But that is impossible, first, because the apostasy is of a religious nature, not political, and second, because the apostasy in question is not one which need be called by a new name, because this apostasy is understood to be the defection from God, the true faith and religion once professed. Paul himself explains (1 Tim.4:1): "The Spirit says clearly that in the latter times certain ones will commit apostasy from the faith."

Most of the Fathers support us on this point (Chrysost., Theophyl., Oecumen., Theodor.), the last of whom calls the "estrangement from God." Augustine concurs (City of God, book 20, chap.19), as does Cyril of Jerusalem (Catech. 11). From the Pontiffs, Thomas, Lyranus, Alcazar, Suárez (tom.2, q.59, art.6, dist.34): "Although most Latins understand this to be about the defection from the Roman empire, nevertheless, it is more properly understood regarding the defection from Christ," etc.’ Francis Turretin, ‘The 7th Disputation - Whether It Can Be Proven The Pope of Rome is AntiChrist’, chapter 16, 1664


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#27 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:38 PM

1664: Francis Turretin:

‘The Pontiffs would have us believe it is a political apostasy from the Roman empire referred to here. But that is impossible, first, because the apostasy is of a religious nature, not political, and second, because the apostasy in question is not one which need be called by a new name, because this apostasy is understood to be the defection from God, the true faith and religion once professed. Paul himself explains (1 Tim.4:1): "The Spirit says clearly that in the latter times certain ones will commit apostasy from the faith."

Most of the Fathers support us on this point (Chrysost., Theophyl., Oecumen., Theodor.), the last of whom calls the "estrangement from God." Augustine concurs (City of God, book 20, chap.19), as does Cyril of Jerusalem (Catech. 11). From the Pontiffs, Thomas, Lyranus, Alcazar, Suárez (tom.2, q.59, art.6, dist.34): "Although most Latins understand this to be about the defection from the Roman empire, nevertheless, it is more properly understood regarding the defection from Christ," etc.’ Francis Turretin, ‘The 7th Disputation - Whether It Can Be Proven The Pope of Rome is AntiChrist’, chapter 16, 1664


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics

#28 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 04 December 2003 - 07:40 PM

1685: Thomas Manton:

‘But because he is called the man of sin, here it cometh fitly to be inquired whether Antichrist be an individual person? for ‘that man of sin’ would seem to be some single person. No; he is put for a society and succession of men, that make up the head of the apostate state. As one lion figured the whole kingdom of the Babylonians, and one bear the kingdom of the Medes and Persians, and one leopard the kingdom of the Grecians, Dan. vii.,—and there the fourth beast is the fourth kingdom,—so one person that succession of men that head the revolters from Christ. So Dan. viii., a goat figured a succession of kings; so the Assyrian, Isa. x. 5, several kings in that empire; so Isa. xiv. 9, the king of Babylon, meaning not one but many.

So this man of sin doth not note a single man, but a succession of men, a body politic or corporate, under one opposite head to the kingdom of Christ: so the ‘man of God’ is put for all faithful ministers, 2 Tim. iii. 17; so ‘honour the king,’ I Peter ii. 17, series regum. So o arciereus, Heb. ix. 25, ‘The high priest every year entereth into the holy place;’ meaning not one, but the succession of the order; and in reason it must needs be so here. Because Antichrist, from his beginning to his end, from his rise and revelation, till his ruin and destruction, will take up such a long track of time, as cannot fall within the age of any one man, even from the time of the apostles till the end of the world.’ Thomas Manton, ‘Eighteen Sermons On Second Thessalonians 2: On the Description, Rise, Growth and Fall of AntiChrist’, sermon 3, 1685

‘Two persons I find in scripture charged for usurping divine honours. The one, Herod Agrippa, who was smitten by an angel for not giving God the glory, when the people cried, ‘The voice of God, and not of man,’ Acts xii. 22: his fault was accepting what was ascribed by others. The other is the prince of Tyre: Ezek. xxviii. 2, ‘Because thy heart is lifted up, and thou hast said I am God, I sit in the seat of God, in the midst of the seat; yet thou art a man, and not God, though thou set thy heart as the heart of God.’ His fault was taking upon him, as if he were God, to accept divine honours, to do those things which would make him equalise himself to our Lord Christ, blessed for ever.’ Thomas Manton, ‘Eighteen Sermons On Second Thessalonians 2: On the Description, Rise, Growth and Fall of AntiChrist’, sermon 4, 1685


Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
target="_blank">Apologetics




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users