Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Apostolic Interpretation

Expand Messages
  • e_s_c_h_a_t_o_n
    Yes. I wrote earlier; ... taught in the Christian tradition, besides the heretic Cerinthius, until Nepos of Egypt.
    Message 1 of 43 , Jan 14, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Yes. I wrote earlier;

      >>Something close to modern premillennialism wasn't
      taught in the Christian tradition, besides the heretic Cerinthius, until Nepos of Egypt.<<

      Dionysius wrote in response to Nepos, and persuaded Nepos of his error. Nepos belief was different than that of the earlier fathers.

      I might add that there was a strong backlash against Montanism that also brought criticism of the Apocalypse. But judging from what Tertullian wrote, the Montanists were not premillennial although they probably could be considered chiliasts. I am saying that premillennialism and chiliasm are really very different beliefs, despite the later misunderstanding. I believe original chiliasm was closer to amillennialism. The modern misunderstanding of these things can be attributed to the reaction against the earlier fathers by the post-Constantine fathers, and that reaction was because Jewish interpretation had crept into the church in the second century.

      1. There was the original apostolic teaching on prophecy, but it was a bit hard for the average first and second century Christian to understand. (1 Cor 3:2)

      2. In the vacuum Jewish error, that Barnabas warns of, crept in.

      3. This error caused a backlash against the earlier beliefs by the post-Constantine fathers. They were actually rebelling against an error, but threw the baby out with the bath water.

      4. Excessive literalism has contributed to this misunderstanding.


      Alan Fuller



      --- In revelation-list@yahoogroups.com, George F Somsel <gfsomsel@...> wrote:
      >
      > Dionysius of Alexandria wrote to oppose a chiliast view before Eusebius as well.
      > 1 Besides all these the two books on the Promises were prepared by him. The
      > occasion of these was Nepos, a bishop in Egypt, who taught that the promises to
      > the holy men in the Divine Scriptures should be understood in a more Jewish
      > manner, and that there would be a certain millennium of bodily luxury upon this
      > earth.
      > 2 As he thought that he could establish his private opinion by the Revelation of
      > John, he wrote a book on this subject, entitled Refutation of Allegorists.
      > 3 Dionysius opposes this in his books on the Promises. In the first he gives his
      > own opinion of the dogma; and in the second he treats of the Revelation of John,
      > and mentioning Nepos at the beginning, writes of him in this manner:
      > Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History vii.24
      >
      >  george
      > gfsomsel
      >
    • George F Somsel
      You must also remember that this would have been read more than once so there would be opportunities to pick up further details later.  george gfsomsel …
      Message 43 of 43 , Jan 15, 2011
      • 0 Attachment
        You must also remember that this would have been read more than once so there
        would be opportunities to pick up further details later.

         george
        gfsomsel


        … search for truth, hear truth,
        learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,
        defend the truth till death.


        - Jan Hus
        _________




        ________________________________
        From: Jon Newton <jonknewton@...>
        To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
        Sent: Sat, January 15, 2011 4:05:32 PM
        Subject: Re: [revelation-list] Apostolic Interpretation

         
        Thanks for those comments George

        I fully agree about the intended audience which is clearly stated in Rev.1

        I also fully agree about the centrality of Jesus is the text, which seemed to be
        Alan's key thought too.

        Not sure about your comments about the details and speed reading. While I'm sure
        each detail is by no means random, the original audience would have been
        hearing, not reading, the text. This helps explain the sevens and other
        structural features in Revelation. But it makes it unlikely they could
        concentrate on the intricate detail of each stage of the revelation.

        Jon

        (Pastor) Jon Newton

        --- On Sun, 16/1/11, George F Somsel <gfsomsel@...> wrote:

        From: George F Somsel <gfsomsel@...>
        Subject: Re: [revelation-list] Apostolic Interpretation
        To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com
        Received: Sunday, 16 January, 2011, 3:31 AM

         

        I really don't know why we should discuss either Constantine or Justinian or any


        other figure subsequent to the penning of the Apocalypse.  It was not written

        primarily for a later age.  It was written for those to whom the book was

        delivered by the author's courier in his circuit around the loop which

        constituted the diocese of the author of the Apocalypse.  It was meant to be

        understood by them -- one must accept that it would have been compreshensible to


        them with their knowledge of the OT and the apocalyptic literature as well as

        the intimate knowledge they would have of their own age.  This was not something


        which would only become clear years and centuries or even millenia thereafter. 

        It was a message to the bishop's parishoners.  It is only a message to us today

        in the sense that they still convey the same vital message which was set to

        "paper" when it was written just as Paul's letters were primarily letters to

        living and breathing people of the time in which he lived.  They are still

        meaningful and even vitally significant to us today, but we understand them much


        less easily than the original recipients would have.

         george

        gfsomsel

        … search for truth, hear truth,

        learn truth, love truth, speak the truth, hold the truth,

        defend the truth till death.

        - Jan Hus

        _________

        ________________________________

        From: asteresplanetai <asteresplanetai@...>

        To: revelation-list@yahoogroups.com

        Sent: Sat, January 15, 2011 6:27:46 AM

        Subject: Re: [revelation-list] Apostolic Interpretation

         

        +++

        > Posted by: "e_s_c_h_a_t_o_n" rocsy@... e_s_c_h_a_t_o_n

        > In the fourth century the Roman emperor Constantine made

        > Christianity the religion of the Roman Empire.

        Just a minor correction, although it may color the way one sees some

        things: Constantine did *not* make Christianity the religion of the

        Roman Empire. Constantine made Christianity *legal*-- that is, he

        stopped the persecutions-- by the Edict of Milan, and he certainly

        encouraged it-- but it was Justinian who made it officially 'the

        religion of the Roman Empire', about 2 centuries later.

        And as usual, it's good to keep in mind that 200 years back then were

        the same as 200 years today. From Constantine to Justinian would be

        the same length of time as between, say, Thomas Jefferson and Barack

        Obama.

        kind regards,

        John burnett.

        Help Uganda high school students graduate!

        http://jbburnett.com/africa/uganda%20kids%2020090111.pdf

        My South Africa education mission:

        http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=johnbburnett

        Contribute through Paypal at

        http://jbburnett.com/blogs/blogafrica.html

        or send checks to---

        St Nicholas African Education Fund

        102 Ross Avenue, San Anselmo, CA 94960

        Tel 415 454 0982

        Thanx!

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.