Where did this assumption come from?

[Doom]

In the Sunday Missal St. Joseph Edition, there is a brief commentary before every scripture reading. I've taken to not even reading it anymore because it is terrible, often asserting, for example, that stories in the Bible are completely fictional or legendary, and not the "obvious" things other like the early chapters of Genesis which many commentators, even among the Fathers, didn't take literally. I mean things like the visit of the Magi.

Before the epistle reading this week, the commentary claimed that Paul believed that the Second Coming would be in his lifetime, as a way of dismissing the reading. The reading begins "Time is running out", and concludes "The present form is passing away."

This is proof that Paul believed the Second Coming would be in his lifetime? Really It seems obvious to me that "time is running out" because life is short (the older I get the shorter it seems) and "the present form is passing away" because everything is. This seems like a normal warning not to cling to this world because it won't last, which is all over the Bible, Old and New Testaments alike.

Where did this assumption that "the apostles believed that the Second Coming would happen during their own time" come from? They didn't get that idea from the text of the New Testament because it is not there. This is one of those myths, like "Christmas was an attempt to copy a pagan holiday" and "The Catholic Church was founded by Constantine." There must have been some commentator in the 19th or 20th centuries who made this claim once and everyone has been running with it ever since. Who was it? Albert Schweitzer? Rudolf Bultmann? Who?

[Obi-Wan Kenobi]

Schweitzer, probably.

[Doom]

That' is my first thought. He is famous for thinking Jesus was preaching the end of the world and that he died in despair when he realized it wouldn't happen, this in a book which demolishes the 19th century "Quest for the Historic Jesus" caricature view of Jesus only to end up creating yet another caricature in the process.

[Riverboat]

Schweizer and others notwithstanding, I remind myself that Jesus WILL come in my lifetime. My timeline is not the same as others, and I may not have the privilege of reading the responses to my post later this evening, Houstonians being the kind of drivers they are.

[Peetem]

Schweizer and others notwithstanding, I remind myself that Jesus WILL come in my lifetime. My timeline is not the same as others, and I may not have the privilege of reading the responses to my post later this evening, Houstonians being the kind of drivers they are.

You are right to live as if Jesus could come anytime, even in our lifetimes.

That being said, I don't see the second coming likely while I'm alive. Many things need to happen...they still could. But, the rebuilding of the temple and the large conversion of the Jews seems unlikely. If I had to guess, I think we're 100 to 150 years away. Although some think we could be a couple of 1,000 years away.

Then there are prophecies of some Saints that see a great King coming that will unite the world under Christendom and bring about an ear of peace. This is the harbinger of the antichrist and that period of peace only lasts about 60 years. However, there is good debate if this prophecy is pious legend, Who knows?

[peregrinator]

But, the rebuilding of the temple and the large conversion of the Jews seems unlikely.

I don't think the Church teaches that the Temple will be rebuilt before Our Lord comes again.

[Kage_ar]

But, the rebuilding of the temple and the large conversion of the Jews seems unlikely.

I don't think the Church teaches that the Temple will be rebuilt before Our Lord comes again.

AMEN. This has crept in from that certain dispensationalist with of Evangelicalism.

[Doom]

It absolutely does not come from Dispensationalism, it is much older than that and goes back to the Early Church. When Emperor Julian the Apostate began his campaign to destroy Christianity one of his projects was to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem. He was aware of the Christian belief that the temple would not be rebuilt until the End Times so he figured that if he could rebuild it and the End Times did not come, it would disprove Christianity.

When work began, there were reports of fireballs shooting out of the Earth which was interpretedted as sign of divine disfavor so the work was immediately halted and because Julian died soon after it has never been resumed. Whether the fireballs actually happened and if so if they were of supernatural origin has been debated for centuries. Some historians have suggested Christians hid phosphorus in the ruins to scare off the workers.

But ever since then, Julian has been called a “type of antichrist” because his attempt to rebuild the temple is an anticipation of what the Antichrist will do successfully.

This all happened centuries before Dispensationalism was a thing.

[peregrinator]

Um no, it wasn't that the Temple wouldn't be rebuilt until the End Times (how would rebuilding it in that case "disprove Christianity"? It would just make people think the End Times were at hand) - it's that it would never be rebuilt.

[Peetem]

But, the rebuilding of the temple and the large conversion of the Jews seems unlikely.

I don't think the Church teaches that the Temple will be rebuilt before Our Lord comes again.

AMEN. This has crept in from that certain dispensationalist with of Evangelicalism.

Perhaps the temple thing isn't correct - although as Doom describes, this belief goes back much farther than the last 200 years.

However, the conversion of the Jews is 100% correct. What the actual # is not known.

674 The glorious Messiah's coming is suspended at every moment of history until his recognition by "all Israel", for "a hardening has come upon part of Israel" in their "unbelief" toward Jesus. St. Peter says to the Jews of Jerusalem after Pentecost: "Repent therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out, that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that he may send the Christ appointed for you, Jesus, whom heaven must receive until the time for establishing all that God spoke by the mouth of his holy prophets from of old." St. Paul echoes him: "For if their rejection means the reconciliation of the world, what will their acceptance mean but life from the dead?" The "full inclusion" of the Jews in the Messiah's salvation, in the wake of "the full number of the Gentiles", will enable the People of God to achieve "the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ", in which "God may be all in all".

[Jack3]

"From now on those who have wives should live as if they do not; 30 those who mourn, as if they did not; those who are happy, as if they were not"

What does this mean?

[Kage_ar]

It needs to be read in context, firstly.

The USCCB footnotes say:

"The world…is passing away: Paul advises Christians to go about the ordinary activities of life in a manner different from those who are totally immersed in them and unaware of their transitoriness."

Haydock commentary on the entire chapter:

https://www.ecatholic2000.com/haydock/n ... t148.shtml