Belief in the “rapture” as it is commonly understood in some strands of contemporary Christianity, particularly in evangelical and some fundamentalist circles, is a relatively modern theological concept. It emerged in the 19th century, primarily through the teachings of John Nelson Darby, an Anglo-Irish evangelist and a founder of the Plymouth Brethren movement.
Darby’s theology included the idea of the “pre-tribulation rapture,” which suggests that before a period of great tribulation on Earth, believers will be taken up to heaven to be with Christ, sparing them from the worst of these events. This concept gained popularity through the teachings of Darby and later through the Scofield Reference Bible, which incorporated Darby’s views into its footnotes and commentary, further spreading the idea within certain Christian circles.
It’s important to note that the concept of the rapture is not universally accepted within Christianity. Many branches of Christianity, including Eastern Orthodox Christianity, do not hold to the doctrine of the rapture as it is commonly understood in evangelical theology. They interpret passages related to the second coming of Christ differently and do not adhere to a pre-tribulation rapture doctrine. Instead, they typically emphasize themes of Christ’s final judgment and the eventual renewal of creation.
Rapture theology, also known as the doctrine of the Rapture, is a belief primarily held within certain branches of Protestant Christianity, particularly within evangelical and fundamentalist circles. It emerged in the 19th century as part of a broader movement known as dispensationalism, but its roots can be traced back to earlier theological developments, including those within Puritanism.
The American Puritans, who settled in the New England colonies in the 17th century, held beliefs that contributed to the development of later Rapture theology. While the term “Rapture” itself may not have been used during this period, Puritan theology laid the groundwork for certain aspects of the doctrine.
- Eschatological Focus: The Puritans had a strong interest in eschatology, or the study of end times prophecy. They believed in the imminent return of Christ and the establishment of his kingdom on earth. This focus on eschatology created fertile ground for later developments in Rapture theology.
- Millenarianism: Many Puritans held to a form of millenarianism, which taught that Christ would return to establish a thousand-year reign of peace on earth (the millennium) before the final judgment. While not all Puritans subscribed to this belief, it was influential in shaping their eschatological views.
- Pre-Millennialism: Within the broader framework of millenarianism, some Puritans embraced a belief in pre-millennialism, which taught that Christ would return before the millennium to rapture believers, ushering in a period of tribulation followed by his earthly reign. This belief laid the foundation for later developments in Rapture theology.
- Interpretation of Biblical Prophecy: Puritan theologians often engaged in detailed studies of biblical prophecy, seeking to understand its relevance to their own time. While their interpretations differed from later dispensationalist views, they contributed to the broader tradition of interpreting biblical prophecy in light of current events and eschatological expectations.
While the specific terminology and systematic formulation of Rapture theology came later, the seeds of this doctrine can be found in the eschatological beliefs of the American Puritans. Later developments in dispensationalism, particularly in the 19th and 20th centuries, would build upon these foundations to articulate the doctrine of the Rapture as it is understood in many evangelical and fundamentalist circles today.
please compare the points which where eastern orthodox christianity and Protestant churches differ. include topics such as the rapture, millenarianism and pre-Millenarianism, focus on prophecy, and dispensationalism.. how else does the Orthodox church differ from the protestant churches that followed? ChatGPT
ChatGPT
Eastern Orthodox Christianity and Protestantism differ on several theological points, including eschatology (the study of end times) such as the rapture, millenarianism, pre-millennialism, focus on prophecy, and dispensationalism. Here’s a comparison between the two:
- Rapture:
- Protestantism: Many Protestant denominations, particularly those influenced by dispensationalism, believe in the concept of the rapture. This belief suggests that believers will be taken up to heaven before a period of tribulation on Earth.
- Eastern Orthodoxy: Orthodox Christianity generally does not adhere to the concept of the rapture. Instead, it focuses more on the Second Coming of Christ and the final judgment.
- Millenarianism and Pre-Millenarianism:
- Protestantism: Some Protestant groups, especially those with pre-millennialist beliefs, anticipate a literal thousand-year reign of Christ on Earth before the final judgment.
- Eastern Orthodoxy: While Orthodoxy does believe in the Second Coming of Christ, it typically does not hold to a literal thousand-year reign on Earth before the final judgment. Instead, interpretations may lean towards amillennialism or post-millennialism, viewing the millennium symbolically rather than literally.
- Focus on Prophecy:
- Protestantism: Many Protestant groups, particularly those influenced by dispensationalism, place significant emphasis on interpreting and predicting future events based on biblical prophecy.
- Eastern Orthodoxy: While Orthodox Christians do study biblical prophecy, they tend to have a more cautious approach and do not prioritize speculative interpretations or predictions about future events to the same extent as some Protestant groups.
- Dispensationalism:
- Protestantism: Dispensationalism is a theological system that divides history into distinct periods or “dispensations” and emphasizes the discontinuity between these periods. It often includes beliefs such as a pre-tribulation rapture and a literal interpretation of biblical prophecy.
- Eastern Orthodoxy: Orthodox Christianity does not adhere to dispensationalism. Instead, it generally emphasizes continuity in God’s plan throughout history and interprets biblical prophecy within the broader context of the Church’s tradition and teachings.
Other differences between Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestantism include:
- Authority: Orthodox Christianity places a strong emphasis on tradition, including the authority of the early Church Fathers and ecumenical councils, alongside Scripture. Protestantism, particularly sola scriptura denominations, prioritize Scripture as the ultimate authority.
- Sacraments: Orthodox Christianity emphasizes the importance of sacraments such as baptism, chrismation (confirmation), Eucharist, etc., as means of grace and communion with God. Protestant views on sacraments vary widely, with some denominations recognizing only baptism and communion as sacraments, while others may have different interpretations or practices.
- Church Structure: Orthodox Churches typically have a hierarchical structure with bishops, priests, and deacons, emphasizing the apostolic succession. Protestant churches vary in their ecclesiastical structures, with some having hierarchies similar to Orthodoxy, while others may have a more congregational or presbyterian polity.
- Theology: While there are many theological differences between various Protestant denominations and Eastern Orthodoxy, some key distinctions include views on salvation, grace, the role of the Virgin Mary and the saints, etc. Orthodox theology tends to be deeply rooted in the early Church Fathers and the liturgical tradition.
Look at the timeline, schisim, puritans, new thought and protestant expansion .. compared to the rigid orthodox
Orthodox: Jesus gave us a Church not a bible… Bible alone isnt enough and can be misunderstood
Date / calendar is the OC did not move to the enhanced) gregorian calendar why?
Historical context: By the time the Gregorian calendar was introduced in 1582, the Eastern Orthodox Church had already been using the Julian calendar for centuries. The calendar had become deeply ingrained in the ecclesiastical and cultural practices of Orthodox Christianity.
Autonomy and tradition: The Eastern Orthodox Church is independent of the Roman Catholic Church, and decisions regarding ecclesiastical matters, including the calendar, are made autonomously by the various Orthodox patriarchates and synods. There was a desire to maintain this autonomy and not be perceived as conforming to a change imposed by Western authorities, especially given the historical and theological differences between Eastern Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism.
Rejection of papal authority: The introduction of the Gregorian calendar was a papal decree issued by Pope Gregory XIII. The Eastern Orthodox Church, which does not recognize papal supremacy, may have been hesitant to adopt a calendar reform initiated by the Pope.
Socio-political factors: The Gregorian calendar reform was closely associated with Western European powers and their colonial expansion. In regions where Orthodoxy was dominant, there may have been resistance to adopting a calendar associated with Western influence.
What is also true, is EO don’t change without a VERY good reason, and even then, it takes time.
As an example, the EO did make a new calendar, called the Revised Julian Calendar. It has Christmas and some other dates being in line with the Gregorian Calendar.
However, it won’t last that way forever – in either 50-100 years it’ll be out of sync with the Gregorian as well.
It also still uses the Julian timing for Pascha.
The thing is, shifting to the “New Calendar” was not well received, and while synods had to vote, many parishes within them schism’d because of it, and viewed it as a stepping stone to ecumenism and false union with Rome and the West.
That is from an internal initiative.
So you can imagine how they felt about the Roman Pope just decreeing a new calendar.
The phrase “Hell no.” doesn’t begin to do that justice. ??
Likewise, for the EO, time does not revolve around planets, stars, etc. but around God. Planets, stars, etc are a means to an end, not the focus. So their drift or their changing is widely irrelevant.
The Orthodox use of the Julian Calendar, is because it’s what was being used at the time of Christ. So since everything the EO does, focuses on, and points to Christ, the same is true of the calendar: using the calendar used by Christ. As for dates for Pascha or any other EO fast or feast, the point of the calendar is not astronomical calculations or followings, but rather, is about moving through the Ecclesiastical Life of the Church, which each member gets to participate in.
Some things happen to mostly line up with some seasons, or may have some closeness to astronomical events – but these are seen as secondary and poetic, and even if it was totally flipped, it would not matter, because they are not the point. For example, Pascha is during spring, usually. This year the season is a bit “off” – but so what? We are celebrating Life Himself conquering death and saving all – any season can be appropriate for that. In this way, we say that all of creation tells of the glory of God – but this is why the point of the church calendar is not astronomical, but ecclesiological. (Which the West mostly lost…)
why dont orthodox refute all the churches of today?
Protestants are not a united group, and have many conflicting, contradictory, etc beliefs. Some are more widespread than others, but there’s no exhaustive list that I’m aware of. Likewise, we don’t “react” to every new innovation randoms on the street come up with. So if “Pastor” Billy Bob down the road decides that all dogs go to heaven but cats go to hell, there isn’t an Orthodox response, because it’s nonsensical when viewed through the Phronema of the Church.
Zionism , apocopliptic , fulfilling prophecies
Started after Darby .. but Puritians and the Schism paved the way
A – There’s a bit of cosmic irony as well though, such that the hearts of people becoming hardened to the point that they support mass evil, and/or think themselves worthy of fulfilling a prophecy – technically COULD be the sort of thing that does, but if that happens, it’s NOT them being agents of God, so much as just becoming the evil that was forewarned about.
B – Likewise, as you know, there is no rapture.
C – There is a second coming – and its the Great and Terrible Day of the Lord. Those that want to hasten it, do so out of pride for themselves, not Godly love for their fellow man.
God controls the timing of things – even if they made something happen, it doesn’t mean it’ll work or usher in what they are trying. It could just be a huge flop, and they commit all manner of evil for no reason. Mao, Stalin and Hitler are just “modern” examples of extreme evil, that had little to nothing to do with the Grand Design of prophecy or The End.
Likewise, as a funny tidbit of history – the destruction of the 2nd Temple, seems to mostly be “accidental” – the Romans didn’t intend to do it, shit just happened, and no one is entirely sure how, or how it got out of hand so fast. ??
So yeah. The spirit of your post there is on point – it’s not our job or place. What is our job and place, is to do the work and fight the good fight sitting in front of us. ??????
Not like how they describe I don’t think. We believe in the Second Coming, and with it, all gets remade, recapitulated, for some that’s Hell, for others it’s Heaven – and it’s eternal.
We don’t recommend people usually read Revelation and try to understand it. Doing such without the proper Phronema of the Church leads to crazy cults and even heresies.
Belief in the “rapture” as it is commonly understood in some strands of contemporary Christianity, particularly in evangelical and some fundamentalist circles, is a relatively modern theological concept. It emerged in the 19th century, primarily through the teachings of John Nelson Darby, an Anglo-Irish evangelist and a founder of the Plymouth Brethren movement.
Darby’s theology included the idea of the “pre-tribulation rapture,” which suggests that before a period of great tribulation on Earth, believers will be taken up to heaven to be with Christ, sparing them from the worst of these events. This concept gained popularity through the teachings of Darby and later through the Scofield Reference Bible, which incorporated Darby’s views into its footnotes and commentary, further spreading the idea within certain Christian circles.
It’s important to note that the concept of the rapture is not universally accepted within Christianity. Many branches of Christianity, including Eastern Orthodox Christianity, do not hold to the doctrine of the rapture as it is commonly understood in evangelical theology. They interpret passages related to the second coming of Christ differently and do not adhere to a pre-tribulation rapture doctrine. Instead, they typically emphasize themes of Christ’s final judgment and the eventual renewal of creation.
Rapture theology, also known as the doctrine of the Rapture, is a belief primarily held within certain branches of Protestant Christianity, particularly within evangelical and fundamentalist circles. It emerged in the 19th century as part of a broader movement known as dispensationalism, but its roots can be traced back to earlier theological developments, including those within Puritanism.
Rapture theology starts in the 17th century with the American puritans.
No church teaching before then exists concerning such. It’s not Christian theology, it’s modern innovation
God wants to save people. Case by case