| Revision as of 07:43, 7 December 2010 editStAnselm (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers160,774 edits started revision to approach a consensus - deleted references that are not talking about the son of perdition - and we don't need Lanier if we have Jamieson← Previous edit | Revision as of 15:33, 7 December 2010 edit undoEickman (talk | contribs)789 edits Undid revision 401016947 by StAnselm (talk)Next edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| {{ActiveDiscuss|date=December 2010}} | {{ActiveDiscuss|date=December 2010}} | ||
| The phrase '''son of perdition''' is used in the ] to refer in a ] fashion to "one who has fallen victim to destruction."<ref name=Kittel>{{cite book|title=Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, Volume I|year=1964|publisher=Wm. B. Eerdmans|author=Albrecht Oepke|chapter=ἀπολλυμι|editor=Gerhard Kittel|location=Grand Rapids|page=397}}</ref> | |||
| According to ] ] and ] beliefs, and secular historians and scholars, the concept of the '''Son of Perdition''' (also called "the beast that goes into perdition" in ''Revelation'' {{bibleverse-nb||Revelation|17:8}} and {{bibleverse-nb||Revelation|17:11}}) is used in the ] in one or more of three contexts, forming a (or trinity,<ref>http://www.nathan.co.za/message.asp?sermonum=10 see paragraph 40</ref> or ])<ref>Kinship of God and man: An attempt to formulate a thorough-going Trinitarian theology, by J.J. Lanier, see "Trinitarian Idealism," pp 135-147, esp. Syllabus II, p 136</ref> of three potential interpretive references.<ref>Kinship of God and man: An attempt to formulate a thorough-going Trinitarian theology, by J.J. Lanier see "Trinitarian Idealism," pp 135-147, esp. Syllabus II, p 136</ref> | |||
| The phrase is applied to both ] and the ]. | |||
| ==='''First frame of reference:''' ]=== | |||
| Many historians, critics, and many Jewish and Christian scholars believe that the Book of Daniel is about the events in Israel from the beginning of the Babylonian Captivity to the end of the Maccabean Revolt<ref>http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/re/jewish-apocalyptic_bruce.pdf</ref> ]]. These scholars say that the Old Testament reference is to ], the man who attacked the First ] and defiled it by sacrificing a pig on the altar, erecting a statue of Zeus as himself in the temple, raiding the Temple treasury and minting coins saying "Theos Epiphanes" (God manifest), ''etc''. Even those who advocate an interpretation of Daniel that includes the Roman Empire in their interpretations recognize Antiochus as a prototype of "antichrist."<ref>http://www.endtime-truth.com/studies2.html</ref> Matthew Henry would even go so far as to write: | |||
| ==Old Testament Background== | |||
| ] suggests that ] was a ] of the Son of Perdition: | |||
| <blockquote> | |||
| "Of the kings that came after Antiochus nothing is here prophesied, for that was the most malicious mischievous enemy to the church, that was a type of the son of perdition, whom the Lord shall consume with the breath of his mouth and destroy with the brightness of his coming, and none shall help him."<ref>Matthew Henry's Complete Commentary on the Bible, Daniel, chapter 11</ref> | "Of the kings that came after Antiochus nothing is here prophesied, for that was the most malicious mischievous enemy to the church, that was a type of the son of perdition, whom the Lord shall consume with the breath of his mouth and destroy with the brightness of his coming, and none shall help him."<ref>Matthew Henry's Complete Commentary on the Bible, Daniel, chapter 11</ref> | ||
| </blockquote> | |||
| In ''Revelation'' {{bibleverse-nb||Revelation|17:8}} and {{bibleverse-nb||Revelation|17:11}}, John borrowed the "Son of Perdition" concept from the prophecies of Daniel,<ref>Commentary Critical and Explanatory of the Whole Bible, Revelation chapter 17, point 11</ref> relating them by language. He refers to "the star that fell from heaven" ''Revelation'' {{bibleverse-nb||Revelation|9:1}} by two names, one Greek, and the other Hebrew. (''Revelation'' {{bibleverse-nb||Revelation|9:11}}) The Greek name is "Apollyon" (Greek: Aπολλυων), from the Greek root word "apollumi" (Greek:απολλυμι) It refers to utter loss, eternal destruction, and disassociation." ''] The Hebrew name is "Abaddon" (Greek: Aβαδδων), from the Aramaic root word "'abad" (Hebrew transliteration:שׁא), which means the same thing as the Greek root word. ] Daniel {{bibleverse-nb||Daniel|7:11}} says that the eventual destiny of the "great beast" is to be slain, and his body "destroyed" ('abad), and given to the eternal flames (generally accepted by religious scholars to be a reference to ]). | |||
| ==In the New Testament== | |||
| ==='''Second frame of reference''': ]=== | |||
| In ] {{bibleverse-nb||John|17:12}}, ] says that of all his ], none has been lost except the "son of perdition". The ] translates the phrase as "the one doomed to destruction." ] suggests that this verse refers both to Judas' character and to his destiny.<ref>], ''The Gospel According to John'' (Leicester: Apollos, 1991), 563.</ref> The phrase is also used in ] 2:3, where Paul equated it with the ]. | In ] {{bibleverse-nb||John|17:12}}, ] says that of all his ], none has been lost except the "son of perdition". The ] translates the phrase as "the one doomed to destruction." ] suggests that this verse refers both to Judas' character and to his destiny.<ref>], ''The Gospel According to John'' (Leicester: Apollos, 1991), 563.</ref> The phrase is also used in ] 2:3, where Paul equated it with the ]. | ||
| ==='''Third frame of reference:''' ]=== | |||
| In ] {{bibleverse-nb||2nd+thessalonians|2:3}}, the phrase is also used. It is equated with the ], and thus with ].<ref name=Kittel /> | |||
| In ] {{bibleverse-nb||2nd+thessalonians|2:3}}, Paul--writing well after both Jesus and Judas had come and gone to their respective destinies--referred to "the Son of Perdition" in some future sense from the point in time in which he wrote his epistle. He also equated this person with the ]. | |||
| Likewise, In ] {{bibleverse-nb||Revelation|17:8}} and {{bibleverse-nb||Revelation|17:11}}, John, writing well after Jesus and Judas Iscariot had come and gone to their respective destinies, refers to "the beast that goeth into perdition." Assuming a futuristic mode of interpretation, this would also be a reference to a future figure. | |||
| In some variations of ], this future figure is commonly referred to as ]," the ]," or the ]." | |||
| ===Applications=== | |||
| The word "perdition" is used in ] 17 (]) where it refers to the destiny of the ] "that was, and is not". (The ] translates it as "going to his destruction.") Robert Jamieson equates the beast with the Son of Perdition, and makes the connection with both Antiochus and Judas: | |||
| <blockquote> | |||
| ''The following statements are archetypal, and do not reflect every organizational or individual variation:'' | |||
| That a ''personal'' Antichrist will stand at the head of the Antichristian kingdom, is likely from the analogy of Antiochus Epiphanes, the Old Testament Antichrist, "the little horn" in ]; also, "the man of sin, son of perdition" (2Th 2:3-8), answers here to "goeth into perdition," and is applied to an individual, namely, Judas, in the only other passage where the phrase occurs (Joh 17:12).<ref>Robert Jamieson, ''Commentary Critical and Explanatory of the Whole Bible'', . Emphasis original.</ref> | |||
| </blockquote> | |||
| Various sects of ] and ], as well as secular historians and higher critics would acknowledge the use of the phrase "the Son of Perdition" or "the beast that goes into perdition" in one or more of these three frames of reference: | |||
| ] and some secular historians and critics would acknowledge the first frame of reference, as they hold that the ] is strictly Jewish apocalyptic literature.<ref>http://www.annettereed.com/RS-3R03/reed3R03_2-7.pdf</ref> | |||
| ] and Historicist-type Jews ]] would acknowledge the first and third frames of reference, but not the second, as they believe in the coming of the Messiah in the future, but do not believe Jesus is the Messiah.<rev>Qumran-Messianism: Studies on the Messianic expectations in the Dead Sea scrolls, by the Society for New Testament Studies</ref>Understanding Jewish History: Texts and Commentaries, By Steven Bayme, ch 12, Jewish Messianism and Sectarianism</ref> | |||
| Christian ], ] and ], ], and some historians and higher critics would acknowledge the second and third frames of reference, as they acknowlege two advents of Jesus Christ.<ref>http://www.puritansermons.com/sermons/manton03.htm see part II</ref> They may also acknowledge the first frame of reference as a ].<ref>http://www.endtime-truth.com/studies2.html</ref><ref>The Lutheran Witness, volume 36, p 369 "Jesus at the Reformation Centennial" H.M. Zorn</ref><ref>From Ephiphanes to Epimanes (From The Illustrious to The Madman), Tim Case</ref> | |||
| Christian ], ], and the advocates of ]/] would acknowledge the second frame of reference, and possibly the first frame of reference as a ], but not the third, as they do not believe in a literal future fulfillment of prophecy ''per se''.<ref>The Imperial Bible Dictionary by Patrick Fairbairn Antiochus, p 102, entry 4</ref><ref>http://avanim.org/ex-libris/patrick-fairbairn-the-interpretation-of-prophecy/part-2-chap-3-sect-2/</ref> | |||
| A Triunist would recognize all three frames of reference as valid, but in different modes of interpretation. | |||
| ==The son of perdition in Mormon theology== | ==The son of perdition in Mormon theology== | ||
Revision as of 15:33, 7 December 2010
According to orthodox Jewish and Christian eschatological beliefs, and secular historians and scholars, the concept of the Son of Perdition (also called "the beast that goes into perdition" in Revelation 17:8 and 17:11) is used in the Bible in one or more of three contexts, forming a triunism (or trinity, or typology) of three potential interpretive references.
First frame of reference: Antiochus IV Epiphanes
Many historians, critics, and many Jewish and Christian scholars believe that the Book of Daniel is about the events in Israel from the beginning of the Babylonian Captivity to the end of the Maccabean Revolt . These scholars say that the Old Testament reference is to Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the man who attacked the First Temple in Jerusalem and defiled it by sacrificing a pig on the altar, erecting a statue of Zeus as himself in the temple, raiding the Temple treasury and minting coins saying "Theos Epiphanes" (God manifest), etc. Even those who advocate an interpretation of Daniel that includes the Roman Empire in their interpretations recognize Antiochus as a prototype of "antichrist." Matthew Henry would even go so far as to write:
"Of the kings that came after Antiochus nothing is here prophesied, for that was the most malicious mischievous enemy to the church, that was a type of the son of perdition, whom the Lord shall consume with the breath of his mouth and destroy with the brightness of his coming, and none shall help him."
In Revelation 17:8 and 17:11, John borrowed the "Son of Perdition" concept from the prophecies of Daniel, relating them by language. He refers to "the star that fell from heaven" Revelation 9:1 by two names, one Greek, and the other Hebrew. (Revelation 9:11) The Greek name is "Apollyon" (Greek: Aπολλυων), from the Greek root word "apollumi" (Greek:απολλυμι) It refers to utter loss, eternal destruction, and disassociation." The Hebrew name is "Abaddon" (Greek: Aβαδδων), from the Aramaic root word "'abad" (Hebrew transliteration:שׁא), which means the same thing as the Greek root word. Daniel 7:11 says that the eventual destiny of the "great beast" is to be slain, and his body "destroyed" ('abad), and given to the eternal flames (generally accepted by religious scholars to be a reference to hell).
Second frame of reference: Judas Iscariot
In John 17:12, Jesus says that of all his disciples, none has been lost except the "son of perdition". The New International Version translates the phrase as "the one doomed to destruction." D. A. Carson suggests that this verse refers both to Judas' character and to his destiny. The phrase is also used in 2 Thessalonians 2:3, where Paul equated it with the Man of Sin.
Third frame of reference: Antichrist
In 2 Thessalonians 2:3Template:Bibleverse with invalid book, Paul--writing well after both Jesus and Judas had come and gone to their respective destinies--referred to "the Son of Perdition" in some future sense from the point in time in which he wrote his epistle. He also equated this person with the Man of Sin.
Likewise, In Revelation 17:8 and 17:11, John, writing well after Jesus and Judas Iscariot had come and gone to their respective destinies, refers to "the beast that goeth into perdition." Assuming a futuristic mode of interpretation, this would also be a reference to a future figure.
In some variations of Christian eschatology, this future figure is commonly referred to as "antichrist," the "false messiah," or the "false christ."
Applications
The following statements are archetypal, and do not reflect every organizational or individual variation:
Various sects of Jews and Christians, as well as secular historians and higher critics would acknowledge the use of the phrase "the Son of Perdition" or "the beast that goes into perdition" in one or more of these three frames of reference:
Jewish Reconstructionists and some secular historians and critics would acknowledge the first frame of reference, as they hold that the book of Daniel is strictly Jewish apocalyptic literature.
Jewish Messianists and Historicist-type Jews would acknowledge the first and third frames of reference, but not the second, as they believe in the coming of the Messiah in the future, but do not believe Jesus is the Messiah.<rev>Qumran-Messianism: Studies on the Messianic expectations in the Dead Sea scrolls, by the Society for New Testament Studies</ref>Understanding Jewish History: Texts and Commentaries, By Steven Bayme, ch 12, Jewish Messianism and Sectarianism</ref>
Christian Historicists, Dispensationalists and Partial Preterists, Messianic Jews, and some historians and higher critics would acknowledge the second and third frames of reference, as they acknowlege two advents of Jesus Christ. They may also acknowledge the first frame of reference as a typology.
Christian Preterists, Idealists, and the advocates of Realized Eschatology/Sapiential Eschatology would acknowledge the second frame of reference, and possibly the first frame of reference as a typology, but not the third, as they do not believe in a literal future fulfillment of prophecy per se.
A Triunist would recognize all three frames of reference as valid, but in different modes of interpretation.
The son of perdition in Mormon theology
"Son of perdition" is also a phrase used in The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (LDS Church) to describe a person who will not take part in the glory of God in the afterlife. This is in contrast to the vast majority of people, who will receive a "kingdom of glory" after the Final Judgment, and enter into one of three degrees of glory after the resurrection: Celestial, Terrestrial, or Telestial Kingdoms.
Most Latter-day Saints believe that the sons of perdition will be cast into outer darkness; the scriptures do not use this exact phrase in connection with the sons of perdition, but state that they "shall go away into the lake of fire and brimstone, with the devil and his angels."
Mormons believe that free will is one of the greatest gifts of God, and that there might be some who will completely reject Jesus Christ and salvation. God will not force someone, including Satan, to be saved if they do not desire to be saved. Therefore, the Sons of Perdition are allowed to remove themselves from the presence of God and live in whatever degree of darkness they desire.
In this context, the name "Perdition" is often regarded as a proper name that refers to either Lucifer or Cain, both of whom are symbols of ultimate evil.
Two classes of sons of perdition
According to LDS Church theology, there are two classes of persons who will become sons of perdition:
- The pre-mortal spirit followers of Satan. It is taught that, in the pre-mortal life, they chose to follow a plan proposed by Satan, rather than that presented by God the Father and Jesus. Thus ensued the War in Heaven, which resulted in Satan and his followers being cast out of heaven and denied the opportunity of receiving a physical body.
- Those in mortal life who "deny the Holy Ghost," which is generally interpreted as rejecting and denying Christ after receiving a personal witness of him from the Holy Ghost. It is frequently—though not universally—added that a son of perdition must have a "perfect knowledge" of Jesus and that mere faith or belief in him is not enough. Joseph Smith, Jr. taught:
- All sins shall be forgiven, except the sin against the Holy Ghost; for Jesus will save all except the sons of perdition. What must a man do to commit the unpardonable sin? He must receive the Holy Ghost, have the heavens opened unto him, and know God, and then sin against him. After a man has sinned against the Holy Ghost, there is no repentance for him. He has got to say that the sun does not shine while he sees it; he has got to deny Jesus Christ when the heavens have been opened unto him, and to deny the plan of salvation with his eyes open to the truth of it.
In the Doctrine and Covenants, sons of perdition are described as inhabiting "a kingdom which is not a kingdom of glory." The most comprehensive exposition of the phrase is found in Section 76 in the Doctrine and Covenants.
Daughters of perdition
A few LDS Church leaders have speculated whether or not there would be daughters of perdition, as well as sons of perdition. In 1860, LDS Church President Brigham Young stated, "I doubt whether it can be found, from the revelations that are given and the facts as they exist, that there is a female in all the regions of hell." The next year he was even more emphatic: "Woman must atone for sins committed by the volition of her own choice, but she will never become an angel to the devil, and sin so far as to place herself beyond the reach of mercy." In the same discourse he explained his reasoning: "She is not accountable for the sins that are in the world. God requires obedience from man, he is lord of creation, and at his hands the sins of the world will be required." In 1903 another Church President, Joseph F. Smith, also affirmed "that there would be no daughters of perdition."
However, such views are far from universal. After an 1893 meeting of Church President Wilford Woodruff and a group of LDS Church Apostles, they declared, "That there will also be daughters of Perdition there is no doubt in the minds of the brethren". Such conflicting views suggests that this subject has not been settled by a consensus of the LDS Church leadership, nor by a revelation to one of the Church Presidents.
References
- http://www.nathan.co.za/message.asp?sermonum=10 see paragraph 40
- Kinship of God and man: An attempt to formulate a thorough-going Trinitarian theology, by J.J. Lanier, see "Trinitarian Idealism," pp 135-147, esp. Syllabus II, p 136
- Kinship of God and man: An attempt to formulate a thorough-going Trinitarian theology, by J.J. Lanier see "Trinitarian Idealism," pp 135-147, esp. Syllabus II, p 136
- http://www.biblicalstudies.org.uk/pdf/re/jewish-apocalyptic_bruce.pdf
- http://www.endtime-truth.com/studies2.html
- Matthew Henry's Complete Commentary on the Bible, Daniel, chapter 11
- Commentary Critical and Explanatory of the Whole Bible, Revelation chapter 17, point 11
- D. A. Carson, The Gospel According to John (Leicester: Apollos, 1991), 563.
- http://www.annettereed.com/RS-3R03/reed3R03_2-7.pdf
- http://www.puritansermons.com/sermons/manton03.htm see part II
- http://www.endtime-truth.com/studies2.html
- The Lutheran Witness, volume 36, p 369 "Jesus at the Reformation Centennial" H.M. Zorn
- From Ephiphanes to Epimanes (From The Illustrious to The Madman), Tim Case
- The Imperial Bible Dictionary by Patrick Fairbairn Antiochus, p 102, entry 4
- http://avanim.org/ex-libris/patrick-fairbairn-the-interpretation-of-prophecy/part-2-chap-3-sect-2/
- Doctrine and Covenants Section 76:36
- Doctrine and Covenants Section 76:26
- Book of Moses 5:24
- Joseph Smith, Jr., 1844-04-07, reprinted as “The King Follett Sermon,” Ensign, May 1971, p. 13.
- Doctrine and Covenants Section 88:24.
- Doctrine and Covenants Section 76.
- Journal of Discourses 8:222
- ^ Discourse delivered October 8, 1861, pp. 6–7, LDS Church Archives.
- Stan Larsen, ed., A Ministry of Meetings: The Diaries of Rudger Clawson, (Salt Lake City: Smith Associates and Signature Books, 1993], p. 560
- D. Michael Quinn, The Mormon Hierarchy: Extensions of Power (Salt Lake City: Signature Books, 1997), p. 795