It is generally believed that the most important movements associated with the Christian understanding of "last phenomena" emerged in the post-Enlightenment period. Below we will briefly review the New Testament foundations of eschatology, and then move on to consider their more modern interpretations.
New Testament
The New Testament is imbued with the belief that, through the life, death and, above all, the resurrection of Jesus Christ, something new happened in human history. This theme of hope is dominant, even in the face of death. The New Testament brings together a number of eschatological beliefs, of which the following are the most important.
1. Second coming. Jesus Christ is expected to return, ending history. At His “coming” or “appearance,” Christ will announce the “last day” and bring judgment upon the world (1 Thess. 4:16). Some New Testament Scriptures indicate that this return was expected during the lifetime of those who witnessed the resurrection (this includes 1 and 2 Thessalonians). Others believe that the parousia will occur in the future, although it is relevant to the present (the 4th Gospel is of particular importance in this regard).
2. Resurrection. The New Testament proclaims the reality of Christ's resurrection. As noted above, the resurrection has enormous Christological significance. However, the New Testament asserts that the resurrection does not only define the identity and significance of Jesus, important as those were. He also declares that through his faith the believer can participate in the resurrection of Christ. The resurrection of Christ is both the basis and anticipation of the resurrection of believers.
3. Kingdom of God. The idea of the "kingdom of God," especially in Jesus' preaching, assumes an important role in New Testament expectations for the future. This kingdom is seen as something transformative and renewing, breaking into human history to redeem it from its present state. The interpretation of this concept is quite complex and we will soon return to consider some approaches to it.
Augustine: two hail
One of the most fundamental developments of the entire volume of New Testament eschatological ideas belongs to the pen of Augustine of Hippo and is contained in his book “On the City of God.” This work was written in a setting that could easily be called "apocalyptic" - the destruction of the great city of Rome and the collapse of the Roman Empire. The central theme of this work is the relationship between two cities - the “city of God” and the “city of the world.” The complexities of Christian life, especially its political aspects, are caused by the dialectical contradiction between these two cities.
The lives of believers pass through the "intermediate period" that separates the incarnation of Christ from His final return in glory. The Church should be seen as in exile in the "city of peace."
She is in the world, but still does not belong to the world. There is a serious eschatological tension between the present reality, in which the Church is an outcast in the world, forced somehow to maintain its characteristic ethos among an unbelieving world, and the future hope, in which the Church will be delivered from the world and can finally participate in the glory of God. It is clear that Augustine leaves no room for the Donatist idea of the Church as a collection of saints. In Augustine's view, the Church shares the fallen character of the world and therefore includes both pure and unclean, both saints and sinners. Only on the last day will this contradiction be finally removed.
But along with the generally accepted understanding of eschatology, Augustine is also aware of certain dimensions of Christian hope. This is especially evident in his discussion of the contradiction between what human hope currently is and what it will ultimately become. Believers are saved, purified and perfected - however, this happens in hope (in spe), and not in reality (in re). Salvation is only laid in the life of the believer, but it is destined to receive its completion only at the end of history. As noted above, this idea was developed by Luther.
Augustine thus succeeds in offering hope to Christians who ponder the sinful nature of their lives and wonder how they can reconcile it with the gospel injunctions to be holy like God. In Augustine's view, Christians can reach beyond their present circumstances in their hopes. This is not a false or contrived hope. It is solid and certain, based on the resurrection of Christ.
Augustine is aware of the fact that the word "end" has two meanings. "End" can mean "either the cessation of the existence of what has been, or the completion of what has been begun." Eternal life should be considered as a state in which our love for God, begun in this life, is finally brought to completion through union with the object of that love. Eternal life is the “reward that makes perfect,” which a Christian expects throughout his life in faith.
Middle Ages: Joachim of Flores and Dante Alighieri
Augustine proposed a relatively simple scheme of Christian history that viewed the Church period as the era separating the coming of Christ from His return (second coming). But this did not satisfy his later interpreters. Joachim of Flora (c. 1132–1202) developed a more speculative approach to history with a strong eschatological bent, based on the model of the Trinity. According to Joachim, universal history can be divided into 3 eras:
1. The Age of the Father, corresponding to the Old Testament law.
2. The Age of the Son, corresponding to the New Testament law and including the Church.
3. The Age of the Spirit, which will witness the emergence of new religious movements leading to reform and renewal of the Church and the final reign of peace and unity on earth.
The specific dating of these periods gave particular relevance to the views of Joachim of Flores. Each century, he argued, consists of forty-two generations of thirty years each. As a result, the "age of the Son" would end in 1260, followed immediately by a radically new "age of the Spirit." This can be seen as an anticipation of many millenarian movements of our day.
A more poetic approach to eschatological issues is associated with the name of Dante Alighieri (1265–1321). While working in Florence, Dante wrote The Divine Comedy, giving poetic expression to Christian hopes, as well as commenting on the life of the contemporary city of Florence and the Church. The poem takes place in 1300. It describes how Dante was introduced into the depths of the earth by the pagan Roman poet Virgil, who would be his guide through hell and purgatory.
Later we will look at various aspects of Dante's view of hell, purgatory and heaven. This work is an important exposition of the medieval worldview, according to which the souls of the departed must undergo a series of purifying processes before being able to see God, which is the ultimate goal of Christian life.
Enlightenment: eschatology as superstition
The extremely rational atmosphere of the Enlightenment led to criticism of the Christian doctrine of last phenomena as a superstition devoid of any real basis in life. The idea of hell was particularly criticized. The highly utilitarian worldview of the late Enlightenment led to a growing belief that eternal punishment served no useful purpose. L. Feuerbach argued that the idea of “heaven” or “eternal life” is only a projection of the human desire for immortality, which does not have any objective basis.
A deeper critique of the Christian doctrine of hope is found in the writings of Karl Marx. Marx argued that every religion seeks to console those who suffer in this life by convincing them of the joys of the afterlife. By doing this, it distracts them from the real task of transforming the present world to eliminate suffering from it altogether. In many ways, Marxism can be considered a secularized Christian eschatology, in which “revolution” plays the role of “paradise.”
Similar views can be seen in nineteenth-century liberalism. The idea of a cataclysmic end to history was rejected in favor of a doctrine of hope based on the gradual evolution of humanity towards moral and social perfection. Darwin's theory of natural selection seemed to indicate that human history, like all human life, was directed upward to higher and more complex forms. Eschatology was classified as theological antiquity. The concept of the “kingdom of God,” stripped of its New Testament apocalyptic associations, was viewed (for example, by Albrecht Ritschl) as a static area of moral values toward which society moved through gradual evolution.
Rediscovery of eschatology
This view was largely discredited by two events. Firstly, in the last decade of the 19th century. Johann Weiss and Albrecht Schweitzer rediscovered the apocalyptic character of Jesus' preaching and insistently argued that the "kingdom of God" was an eschatological concept. Jesus should be considered not the moral enlightener of humanity, but the herald of the approaching coming of the eschatological kingdom of God.
It should be emphasized that not all New Testament scholars agreed with Weiss and Schweitzer's discovery. For example, the British scholar C. G. Dodd argued that eschatology should not be seen as something entirely oriented towards an unknown future, but as something realized in the coming of Jesus. Three main positions subsequently emerged:
1. Futurist. The Kingdom of God belongs entirely to the future when it invades history destructively (Weiss).
2. Inaugural. The Kingdom of God has already begun to impact human history, although its full realization and fulfillment will occur in the future.
3. Realistic. The Kingdom of God has already been realized in the coming of Jesus Christ.
The second event is the general collapse of confidence in people in civilization as a means of bringing the Kingdom of God to its fulfillment. The First World War was particularly dramatic in this regard. The subsequent genocide of the Jews, the development of nuclear weapons and the threat of nuclear war, and the continuing threat of environmental destruction as a result of human activity have raised doubts about the credibility of liberal humanistic forms of Christianity.
What to do with the idea of eschatology? One approach that attracted considerable attention in the 1950s and early 1960s is that of the Marburg New Testament scholar Bultmann.
Demythologizing: Rudolf Bultmann
Bultmann's controversial call for "demythologization" had a strong influence on beliefs about the end of history. R. Bultmann argued that such beliefs are “myths” that should be interpreted existentially. The New Testament gives "stories" of distant and inaccessible times and places (such as "in the beginning" or "in heaven") in which supernatural forces and events are present. Bultmann argues that such stories have a hidden existential meaning that can be revealed and realized through interpretation.
Probably the most important of these is the eschatological myth of the impending end of the world through direct divine intervention, which will lead to judgment and subsequent reward and punishment. This view is central to our work because it allows Bultmann to comprehensively demythologize the “deep eschatological conditionality” of the New Testament that A. Schweitzer speaks of. From Bultmann's point of view, this “myth”, like others similar to it, can be interpreted existentially.
Recognizing that history has not really come to an end does not refute the eschatological myth. Being interpreted existentially, it relates to modern human existence: inevitably faced with the reality of their death, people are forced to make existential decisions. The “judgment” involved here is not a future divine judgment to take place at the end of the world, but a contemporary event of our judgment upon ourselves based on our knowledge of what God has done in Christ. Bultmann argues that this kind of demythologizing can be found in the 4th Gospel, written at the end of the first century, when the early eschatological expectations of the Christian community began to fade. "Judgment", from Bultmann's point of view, refers to the moment of existential crisis when people are faced with the divine kerygma directed towards them. The "realized eschatology" of the Fourth Gospel arises from the fact that the editor of the gospel realized that the parousia was not a future event, but an already accomplished event caused by the believer's encounter with the kerygma: "The time of the Now of the coming of the One who brings about the Revelation corresponds exactly to the Now." proclamation of the word as a historical fact, the “Now” of the present, present moment... This is the “Now” of the address at a certain moment - the eschatological “Now”, for in it the decision is made between life and death. This hour is coming and, when turning to it, comes now. … Thus, it is incorrect to consider that the parousia, which others expected as an event in time, is now rejected or transformed by John into an internal process of the soul, an experience. On the contrary, John opens the eyes of the readers to the fact that the parousia has already occurred.”
Thus, Bultmann believes that the 4th Gospel partially reinterprets the eschatological myth in the light of its significance for human existence. Christ is not a past phenomenon, but the eternally present Word of God, expressing not a general truth, but a specific proclamation addressed to us and requiring us to make an existential decision. From Bultmann's point of view, the eschatological process became an event in the history of the world and again becomes an event in the modern proclamation of Christianity.
However, such views did not satisfy many critics, who felt that Bultmann abandoned too many of the most important features of the Christian doctrine of hope. For example, Bultmann's concept of eschatology is purely individual; the biblical concept is clearly corporate. At the end of the 1960s. Another approach began to emerge, which, from the point of view of many, offered much more than Bultmann's truncated version of hope.
Theology of Hope: Jurgen Moltmann
Moltmann's work "Theology of Hope" caused a significant response immediately after its publication. Moltmann draws on the views expressed in Ernst Bloch's remarkable work, The Philosophy of Hope. The neo-Marxist analysis of human existence, carried out by E. Blok, is based on the belief that all human culture is driven by the passionate hope that in the future all the alienation of the present will be overcome. Blok believed that his opinion was fully consistent with the biblical idea of revolutionary apocalyptic hope. While Bultmann sought to make eschatology acceptable through demythologization, E. Blok defended it by pointing to the passionate social criticism and prophetic visions of social transformation that accompanied these ideas in their original biblical context.
Based on such views, Moltmann argued for the need to revive the overarching concept of hope as a central driving factor in Christian life and thought. Eschatology must be rescued from its position as “a harmless little chapter at the end of Christian dogma” (Karl Barth) and given a place of honor. If Anselm of Canterbury declared: “I believe in order to understand,” Moltmann declared: “I hope in order to understand.” This hope is not personal, individual, or existential, but an all-encompassing vision of the renewal of lost and fallen humanity through the gracious actions of a loving and redeeming God.
Dispensationalism
Dispensationalism is a movement in modern evangelical Christianity that places particular emphasis on the eschatological aspects of the Christian faith. It has achieved significant influence in the popular American Christian subculture. The term "Dispensationalism" (English, dispensation - law, covenant) reflects the belief that the history of salvation is divided into a number of periods. The origins of this movement were John Nelson Darby (1800–1882), who participated in the Plymouth Brethren movement, although its later development was associated with S. I. Scofield (1843–1921), whose Scofield Expository Bible (1909) was widely accepted in North America.
Two central and characteristic concepts in dispensationalism are "taking up to heaven" and "suffering." The first concerns believers' expectations of being "caught up... in the clouds to meet the Lord" (1 Thess. 4:15-17) at His return. The second is based on the prophetic vision from the book of Daniel (Dan. 9:24-27) and is understood as a seven-year period of judgment on the world. There remains a division among dispensationalist writers as to whether the taking up to heaven will occur before suffering (pretribulationists), or whether believers must endure the pain of suffering, confident that they will subsequently be united to Christ (posttribulationists).
| |
The theological conference is organized by the Synodal Theological Commission and takes place every two years. The 2005 conference, dedicated to the eschatological teaching of the Church, was attended by famous theologians and philosophers from around the world: professors of the Russian Theological Academies, the Paris St. Sergius Theological Institute, professors of theological faculties from universities in Greece, Germany, France, Italy, Austria, Romania, USA, Australia and a number of other countries, representatives of Local Orthodox Churches.
His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Rus' spoke at the first plenary session of the conference.
 | ||
Word of His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Rus' at the opening of the theological conference of the Russian Orthodox Church “Eschatological teaching of the Church”
Your Eminences, Your Eminence Archpastors, All-Honorable Fathers, Distinguished Guests, Brothers and Sisters Beloved in the Lord!
I cordially welcome you, the participants in the international theological conference “Eschatological Teaching of the Church.”
It is gratifying that many good initiatives in our Church are becoming good traditions, an integral part of church life.
The Theological Conference of the Russian Orthodox Church, held once every two years, has also become traditional. This is already the fourth theological forum since the resumption of the tradition of holding church-wide theological conferences in 2000.
We are glad that the theological conferences of the Russian Orthodox Church are acquiring an international character and serving the entire Church Fullness. They are attended by Orthodox theologians and scientists from Local Churches, as well as representatives of other faiths.
The current period of world development is characterized by processes of global, that is, worldwide, changes. The problems that our Church and Christianity as a whole are facing today are to a large extent due to these processes. To resolve existing problems, a “global”, or better yet, universal, response from the Church is needed. To do this, it is necessary to attract the best theological and scientific forces of the Local Churches and conduct conciliar discussions.
As the Primate of the Russian Orthodox Church, I want to say with all certainty: we need strong theological science today.
Holyly preserving the spiritual power of Tradition, following the Patristic tradition, theology today should be the authoritative voice of the Church, an important tool for resolving the tasks facing Her.
Theology is inherently inextricably linked with prayer and the spiritual experience of the Church. But we should not forget that theology is also an activity of reason. Many holy fathers were outstanding thinkers of their time. The victory of Christianity over paganism was a spiritual victory. But it was also a cultural and intellectual victory.
The tradition of church scholarship had a decisive influence on the formation of European philosophy, science and culture at its best. So theology and church science to this day remain inextricably linked with the tradition of philosophical and scientific research.
Therefore, the development of theology and church science is a subject of Our special concern. We note with satisfaction the strengthening of the theological forces of the Church, the development of its scientific institutions and the improvement of theological education.
The current conference is a sign and evidence of this process. At the same time, she herself makes an important contribution to the development of church science and theology.
The topic that this conference is devoted to is very significant and relevant. It is relevant not because problems related to eschatology have recently appeared in the Church.
From the very beginning of the historical existence of the Church, Christians had to resist two temptations so as not to go to extremes. On the one hand, there has always been the danger of the secularization of the Church, the danger of forgetting that “the whole world lies in evil” (1 John 5:19), and identifying Christianity with worldly institutions. On the other hand, there was a tendency to completely reject the world, to refuse to see the God-created goodness of the world (Gen. 1:31), despite its fallenness, to see the saving Providence of God guiding history. This last temptation is also associated with false apocalyptic fears that have arisen repeatedly in the history of the Church.
Christians still experience similar temptations today. Some people, confident in the success of social progress, want to “renew” the Church, to harmonize its teaching with the spirit of the times. Others, seeing the sinfulness of the world, fall into apocalyptic hysteria and call on the Church to fence itself off from the outside world.
In fact, both perceive the Church as one of the social institutions that must act in accordance with worldly logic.
The eschatological vision of the Church is that, while in the world and fulfilling its calling of sanctification and witness, the Church and each individual Christian must spiritually abide in a state of “not of this world.” “Unearthlyness” in this case means participation in the Kingdom of God - a spiritual reality that has already been revealed in the world thanks to the action of the Holy Spirit, but will be revealed in its entirety in the “future age.” The sign and sacrament of this reality is the Church, which is “in this age.”
As a social institution, the Church exists to serve the ascent from below to above. The Church has no “earthly” interests in this world. It embraces the whole world, all creation, for Its Head is Jesus Christ, the Lord and Provider of all creation. The world is the object of the mission and concern of the Church. And Her mission is to reveal, that is, to make present in “this world” the Kingdom, which is “not of this world” (John 18:36). In the light of the original eschatological vision of the Church, all problems of the Church’s relationship with the world and the implementation of its mission in history must be resolved.
Beloved archpastors, shepherds, brothers and sisters! From the bottom of my heart I prayerfully wish blessed success and God’s help in the upcoming labors to all of you, participants in the international theological conference “Eschatological Teaching of the Church.”
On November 14, His Holiness Patriarch Alexy II of Moscow and All Rus' met with foreign guests of the theological conference “Eschatological Teaching of the Church.”
“I think that in our time it is necessary to provide answers to the questions that trouble our believers using conciliar reason,” noted His Holiness Patriarch Alexy during a conversation with foreign theologians gathered at the conference. According to His Holiness the Patriarch, the problems of eschatology relate precisely to such issues. “We are grateful to the Primates of the Local Churches who sent their representatives,” His Holiness the Patriarch emphasized.
Metropolitan Philaret of Minsk and Slutsk, Patriarchal Exarch of All Belarus, Chairman of the Synodal Theological Commission of the Russian Orthodox Church, also noted the great contribution of all those present to the development of theological science.
The meeting was also attended by other representatives of the Local Orthodox Churches, as well as professors of theological faculties from universities in Greece, Germany, France, Italy, Austria, the USA, Australia and several other countries.
The Theological Conference of the Russian Orthodox Church is held every two years. This is the largest international intellectual forum, gathering under the auspices of the Synodal Theological Commission of the Russian Orthodox Church the best Orthodox theologians of our time to understand the current problems of not only church, but also public life, and develop a Christian attitude to the challenges of the modern world. The conference “Eschatological Teaching of the Church” will last until November 17; 60 reports will be read over three days. At the end of the conference, a round table “Globalization and Eschatology” will be held under the chairmanship of Metropolitan Kirill of Smolensk and Kaliningrad.
In the information society, people find themselves more alienated from the real world than ever before. In the biblical sense of the word, to know means to enter into communication. Meanwhile, impersonal information about the world, and even about the suffering of other people, does not foster involvement and makes a person an outside observer. This “outsider” skill prevents us from perceiving the historical presence of God’s incarnate Love for man...
The designation of numbers and numbers by letters of the alphabet was common in ancient languages, including Hebrew. According to numerological practices, the “number of the beast” mentioned in the Revelation of John the Theologian can be deciphered and is the Greek spelling of the name and title Nero Kaisar. In any case, whatever the meaning of his name, Nero traveled the entire path intended for the black geniuses of humanity: with unlimited power and universal worship, with the most famous and equally inhuman acts, and with an inglorious death.
“It would not be an exaggeration to say that each historical era has its own degree of psychological tension, its own feeling of the “end of history.” It has long become traditional to assert that eschatological sentiments are especially widespread during social and political crises. In this regard, speaking about Russia, As a rule, the era of schism is remembered - the second half of the 17th - early 18th centuries. However, the time of the last reign can also be called the era of apocalyptic experiences, a sense of impending catastrophes..."
A prophecy about the approaching end of the world appeared on the website of the Holy Dormition Pochaev Lavra. The Soyuz TV channel is broadcasting about the seal of the Antichrist, which will begin to be placed on January 1 next year. Should this information be taken seriously?
Today in the Church it is not very common to talk about the end of the world. Although this topic remains part of church teaching, for some reason it ends up being “overboard” from church preaching. Meanwhile, it never ceases to worry people; in the information vacuum, someone refuses passports, tax identification numbers and a normal life in the hope of a quick “end.” We talked about what the end of the world is with a professor at the St. Petersburg Theological Academy and Seminary, a leading specialist in New Testament theology, Archimandrite IANNUARIY (Ivliev).
On October 14, 2011, “Religion in Ukraine” republished from “Vatican Radio” in a media review an article by Catholic Bishop Enrico dal Covolo “Who (or what) is holding back the end of the world?”, which talks about the patristic interpretation of the mysterious words of the apostle. Paul about “restraining” the Antichrist - “the man of lawlessness,” “the son of perdition” (2 Thess. 2:3): “And now you know what is holding back, so that it may be revealed to him in due time. For the mystery of iniquity is already at work; only now there is one who restrains him until he is taken away from the environment” (2 Thessalonians 2:6-7; transl. Bishop Cassian). The author’s conclusion: whatever is meant by “restraining” (already in ancient times the following were proposed: the Church, the Apostle Peter, the Archangel Michael, the grace of the Holy Spirit, the will of God, the preaching of the Gospel, idolatry, the Roman Empire, royal power, the state in general), it is important the very fact of retention: it gives place to historical accomplishment, human activity, collaboration and co-creation of man with God
Interest in Christian eschatology, which has increased significantly in church and even parachurch circles recently, comes down mainly to two topics: the “end of the world” and the appearance of the Antichrist. Moreover, the second topic, in turn, is also extremely narrowed and limited only to the “mark”, or “name of the beast” and “the number of his name” (Rev. 18:17-18). Clarifying the reasons for the shift in eschatological emphasis was not part of my task, although such clarification, in my opinion, would greatly help to understand on what basis the disagreements that exist today in the understanding of certain problems of eschatology arose.
Statements that the world will supposedly end in 2012 have nothing to do with Christianity. Chairman of the Synodal Information Department V.R. stated this live on the radio station “Moscow Speaks”. Legoida. “From the point of view of the Christian worldview, any person who names the date of the end of the world, let’s say, takes on a lot,” said V.R. Legoida.
Protodeacon Andrei Kuraev called what is now happening in the Church the “lay Reformation” - an attempt by laity and monks to seize power over the Church, to impose on it their dichotomous worldview and attitude, which knows no compromises or halftones. Arguments are taken, for example, from prophecies attributed to St. Seraphim of Sarov about “that there will be a time when the bishops of the Russian land and other clergy will deviate from preserving Orthodoxy in all its purity, and for this the wrath of God will strike them...” And most often from apocryphal para-church myth-making - “prophecies” of certain anonymous “elders” who can neither be attributed nor verified...
For some reason, the joyful security of a Christian is diminished by today's church literature and - especially - by parachurch gossip. They began to attribute too much to the power of dark forces, belittling the power of God and the Providence of the Creator. For example, if in patristic literature the “seal of the Antichrist” was understood as a conscious and free worship of him, now it has become fashionable to talk about how this seal can be accepted somehow completely unnoticeably, almost by simply going into a store and buying a package of juice with a dash of -code. And, not wanting to renounce Christ, you will suddenly lose him as a result of some outsider touching you or your food...
When the Church speaks about “recent” events, it shows its faith, trust and hope in Christ. She speaks not about what she knows as historical experience, but about what she hopes for. The church fact is not yet a religion in the history of man, and not the best of all religions. Religions provide codified “beliefs” about the afterlife and the end of the world. Religions are products of the natural, instinctive need that a person has for metaphysical certainty - the need, mainly, for the psychological certainty that his self will be “saved,” i.e. will continue to exist forever, that his self will be infinitely happy.
The eschatological question is very acute now. Looking back at the social phenomena of the past century, we see that it was largely marked by eschatological signs. However, in modern times, genuine eschatology is almost invisible, and today's eschatological aspirations are not credible. By the end of the 20th - beginning of the 21st century, against the background of the growing eschatological indifference of European society, a number of eschatological concepts emerged in Christianity. Among them there are many contradictory ones, i.e. containing opposing judgments, but there are also those that do not fit into the tradition at all and that are bad primarily not because they are contradictory, but precisely because they are, so to speak, non-traditional in orientation in relation to the Church...
The people need a living and simple word addressed to them, the word of Life, and not in a solemn style stated and taught from the height of the pulpit, but in a word that is always preached, “in season and out of season” (2 Tim. 4:2 ), in a word that answers the living and trembling questions of our time. And most importantly, in a word that does not diverge from the deed, and therefore from the life of the one who pronounces it. Obviously, then they will listen rather to the word of a true shepherd, and not to some self-proclaimed spiritual leader who frightens his followers with “codes” and “INN”.
In our era, when there is such a lack of living examples, when words and books have multiplied, but life experiences have diminished, when we only admire the holy ascetics of the past, not understanding how great their work was, it is so important to know what is here and now, nearby With us, ascetics of piety, saints, lived and live, whose experience you can touch and make efforts to be like them. And, in the words of Elder Paisius: “The good God will take into account both the characteristics of our era and the conditions in which we have to live, and will ask of us in accordance with this. And if we undertake even a small feat, we will be more crowned than the Christians of ancient times."
The resuscitation of the idea of Moscow - the Third Rome in our days is based, as has already been said, more on the later triumphalist version of this doctrine, bordering on chiliasm, than on the original teaching of Elder Philotheus. However, the idea of the famous old man has another continuity that picks up its eschatological emphasis. This other apocalyptic line of the tradition coming from Philotheus leads to the apocalypticism of the priestless Old Believers, in which, however, due to the fact that the eschatological expectations of the first Old Believers were not fulfilled, the idea of a depersonalized Antichrist. Meanwhile, these ideas, drawn from the eschatology of the Bespopovites, are reproduced with considerable persistence by some of the modern apocalyptics, concerned not so much with the moral state of the modern world as with the game of numbers...
Generally speaking, the idea of a thousand-year messianic kingdom arose against the background of Jewish apocalypticism. The combination of two types of eschatology, national and universal, led to the apocalyptic idea that the Messiah would reign before the end of this world. The end of the world will consist of judgment and the renewal of the world. The symbolic world of the book of Revelation is very rich. The seer John makes extensive use of images and themes from a variety of sources, including Jewish apocalypticism...
Material prepared by Natalya Toporkova
Eschatology(from other Greek ἔσχατος - “final”, “last” + λόγος - “word”, “knowledge”) in its Christian understanding is a section of theology that reflects views on the question of the end of the world and the Second Coming of Christ. Interest in eschatological problems has changed over time. In the first century, Christians lived in anticipation of a quick meeting with Christ, which sometimes led to heresies. Thus, some believed that they would not die before the onset of parousia- that is, the Day of the Lord, and others introduced heresy about the soon coming Coming of Christ, so that they rejected the need for good works and repentance.
Later, the problem of eschatology began to fade, but from time to time the question was raised whether we had entered the eschatological period or not.
The versatility of eschatological issues described in various books of Holy Scripture prompted biblical studies of the 19th and early 20th centuries to begin summarizing all biblical information about the last times and the Second Coming of the Lord and, if possible, describe the picture of these future events. Such theologians as Professor V.N. made a significant contribution to summarizing Christian views on eschatology. Strakhov and Professor N.N. Glubokovsky.
From the 2nd half of the 19th century. to designate the entire sphere of scientific study of the Bible, the term appears in a number of church works "bibliology"(from Greek βιβλος - book, λογος - knowledge, teaching). In 1928 N.N. Glubokovsky in a summary essay "Russian theological science in its historical development and the latest state" entitled the section on biblical studies with this name and believed that it refers him to Divine primary sources and directs him to the study of the monuments of Divine revelation for accurate knowledge. This determines the fundamental importance of biblical studies for Russian theology. Literature of this kind spread in Russia from the first centuries of its Christianization, but at first it was primarily of an edifying nature. Then, towards the end of the 18th - beginning of the 19th centuries, it to some extent grew into an independent theological science, incorporating both the theological roots of the East and the scientific research of the West.
Back in the first half of the 19th century, work began in Russia on translating the Holy Scriptures from Church Slavonic into modern and commonly used Russian. In addition to the lack of Scripture written in an understandable language, there was also the problem of the small circulation of the books of Scripture, as a result of which it was difficult for the people to read it. All these problems led to the need to begin the work of translating and distributing the Bible. In 1812, by the Highest decree of Emperor Alexander I, it was created "Bible Society".
One of the most important theologians is St. Theophan the Recluse. The time of his church-writing creativity fell on the second half of the 19th century. The saint lived for some time on Athos, where he learned Greek, which allowed him later, while in seclusion in the Vyshenskaya Hermitage, to carry out a number of translations of the Greek holy fathers into Russian. The saint accepted the retreat after 6 years in the monastery. Having retired to a separate house, he built a house temple in it and, according to the testimonies of the descriptors of his life, was there for 22 years.
During this time, he managed to become the author of numerous spiritual works and a large epistolary heritage. Volumes of spiritual books began to appear from his pen, including works on the study of the Bible. Thus, he also compiled interpretations of all 14 epistles of St. Pavel. In compiling this work, he was guided mainly by the Eastern holy fathers: St. John Chrysostom, blessed Theodoret, Augustine, Ambrosiastes, St. John of Damascus, Ecumenius, Theophylact of Bulgaria. Western interpreters were also used, but they were present in his works, as a rule, in the role of contrast to the Eastern holy fathers. Sometimes, while reading his books, you come across phrases "our interpreters" or "their interpreters" which speaks of the saint’s constant tendency to divide the views of the two branches of Christian thought.
Speaking about the language of the saint, it should be noted that the writing style is simple and understandable for everyone, and the vocabulary is widely used. Many ascribe this to him as a disadvantage, but from the point of view of spiritual benefit, the simplicity of his language is a great advantage, since it thus attracts the study of the Scriptures and the application of them to life for everyone who wants to walk in the path of salvation.
The task in the interpretations of St. Theophan was not only to reveal the understanding of complex passages of Holy Scripture, but also to tune in to spiritual life and struggle. In his opinion, in order to bring the revealed truth to the heart of a person, it must be “chopped up,” that is, presented as simply and understandably as possible for both the ascetic and the novice. In clarifying the meaning of individual fragments of the Bible, the author of the interpretations primarily wanted the living and active Word of God to penetrate the heart of the reader. That is why he became widely known among ordinary believers, the depth of his pen's research is very deep, he cites ancient translations, referring to the Greek text, where he shows the nuances of the meaning of difficult words.
Having lived for some time on the holy Mount Athos, St. Theophan mastered the Greek language, which allowed him to subsequently carry out a number of translations of the Greek holy fathers into Russian, to which he devoted the time of his six-year retreat in the Vyshenskaya Hermitage (now the Ryazan region). That is why in his exegetical works there are so many references to the Greek original.
Nikolai Nikanorovich Glubokovsky also studied issues of biblical studies. He was born on December 6, 1863 in the village. Kichmengsky Town, Vologda province (died on March 18, 1937). Having lost his own father at the age of two, he was raised in the family of his older sister. In the period from 1874 to 1878, Glubokovsky studied at the Nikolsky Theological School, then entered the Vologda Seminary, after which in 1884 he was enrolled in the Moscow Theological Academy. However, in his fourth year, due to a conflict with its leadership, he was expelled, but reinstated the following year. However, the possible roughness of the initial entry of N.N. Glubokovsky to the SPbDA teaching corporation were erased by the brilliant work of the scientist in the field of research of the books of the New Testament . Since 1889, his specialization was first the study of the papacy and church history of the 5th-6th centuries. In the period from 1890 to 1891. he was sent to the Voronezh seminary, where he already taught the New Testament.
Glubokovsky did not shy away from general church problems; in 1896 he participated in the reform of theological education. Advocating for a radical reform of theological schools, both secondary and higher. Glubokovsky N.N., with his characteristic systematicity, developed the concept of spiritual and pedagogical policy, pointing out the need to study more the Holy Scripture itself, and not the corresponding textbooks.
Since 1905, Professor Glubokovsky took over the editing of the Theological Encyclopedia, founded by A.P. Lopukhin. The encyclopedia immediately changed its character and became an adornment of Russian theological science. The editor put enormous work and energy into the publication. This enterprise was suspended in 1911.
Speaking about the theological heritage in the works of N.N. Glubokovsky, works on biblical studies related to the book of the Acts of the Holy Apostles and the Epistles of St. Paul, occupy the main place in his written heritage. Among them, the greatest work that glorified him as a scientist and theologian was his doctoral dissertation on the apostle. Pavel. Started by him in 1897, it was supplemented over time by new research on AP. Pavel and by 1912 acquired the form of a trilogy with the general title “The Good News of St. Apostle. Paul according to his origin and essence." In addition, scientists conducted research on individual messages. Yes, he is known “The Good News of Christian Freedom in the Epistle of St. Paul to the Galatians", as well as fundamental work "The Good News of St. ap. Paul according to his origin and essence".
Speaking about Glubokovsky’s work methodology, he put the historical and philological method in first place. He believed that a literary monument should be interpreted in the spirit of its time. Glubokovsky used a very deep analysis in the analysis of the texts of the Ap. Paul, analyzing all his predecessors who had already worked on this topic, deeply illuminating very narrow issues. According to contemporaries, his texts were amazing "straight up supernatural learning" and served as the beginning for the creation in Russia "biblical theology that almost did not exist yet". In a sense, his last name can be considered to clearly express the degree and high level of his understanding of the problem. He also participated in the reform of theological education, in which he advocated a change in methods of teaching the New Testament, fighting against "subject education" and advocating for "holistic attitude".
Shortly before leaving, on November 27, 1920, Glubokovsky formalized his marriage with Anastasia Vasilievna Lebedeva (nee Nechaeva), the widow of Professor A.P. Lebedeva, with whom he lived for many years in a civil marriage. After the revolution in 1918, Glubokovsky and his family decide to emigrate to Europe, because "did not want - as he writes himself - to live in an atheistic state", yes, this was becoming impossible. The couple left Petrograd on August 16/29, 1921. Life in exile remained rich and fruitful: teaching, scientific, church and social activities make Glubokovsky a notable figure in the Russian diaspora.
First he was on a business trip in Sweden, then he returned to Russia and spent some time in Vologda. Having learned about the death of his brother - his murder by the Bolsheviks, exile in Uralsk, he finally decided to migrate to Europe and settled in Bulgaria, in Sofia, where he became a teacher at the theological faculty of Sofia University. He also took an active part in international theological conferences. For example, in the 1600th anniversary of the 1st Ecumenical Council in London in 1925. He argued that there is no harm in interreligious conferences, since through them we fulfill Christ's commandment of unity. The scientist died in Sofia. It is noteworthy that Glubokovsky’s funeral took place on the Week of the Triumph of Orthodoxy, in the defense of which he worked so tirelessly all his life.
Over the entire period after emigrating from Russia, he published over 100 articles and notes, while the full bibliography of Glubokovsky’s works contains about a thousand titles. He surpasses not only many Russian biblical scholars, but also foreign ones - both in the number of publications and in the complexity and scientific character of his works. It is known that during his life N.N. Glubokovsky compiled only about 40 major works and more than 1000 articles and notes. He absorbed all the previous experience accumulated by previous theologians in Russia, and, having studied it, created a new comprehensive vision of many theological issues, which his contemporaries, not having complete information, looked at in isolation from the entire theological heritage.
Of his works, the most significant is considered “The Good News of St. Apostle. Paul according to his origin and essence"(1897), which most fully collected all the information about the apostle. Paul, and also studied his theology according to the degree of originality from Jewish ideas. This trilogy, published in three books in 1905, 1910 and 1912, is especially important for us, since it was a worthy response to various representatives of critical schools who questioned the revealed nature of the letters of St. ap. Paul, the most in-depth research was carried out in it.
In the first book of this trilogy, which is considered an introduction to the analysis of the entire theology of “Ap. languages", N.N. Glubokovsky highlighted a number of problems such as the conversion of Saul and the “Gospel” of St. ap. Paul, also compared this gospel to St. Paul with Judeo-rabbinic theology, explored the influence of the apocrypha of the Jewish people, its history and heritage, and Jewish apocalypticism. In the second book, Glubokovsky discusses the influence of Greek culture, expressed by philosophical schools (Philo of Alexandria), Hellenic and Roman law on the course of thought of the apostle. Pavel. The third book comes to the conclusion about the revealed nature of all the letters of St. ap., that is, all the 14 epistles he wrote, while recognizing the independence of his revelation from human pre-Christian views. The apostle himself speaks about his otherworldliness and spirituality, writing in his epistles to the Galatians: “ The gospel that I preached is not human, for I also received it... through the revelation of Jesus Christ"(Gal.1:11-12). Developing this idea, Prof. N.N. Glubokovsky discusses the need for the participation of reason in analyzing the truths of faith. Although faith is created in the heart and not in the mind, it must be based on a rational approach, “since “reasonable God” can become “reasonable human” only through a reasonable method of scientific argumentation”.
In this major work N.N. Glubokovsky shows that the teachings of the ap. Paul, split by negative critics into many supposedly different ideas, in fact represents a complete system and has its source in the teaching of the Lord Jesus Christ. It provides an answer to the question of whether there could have been an ap. Paul's approach to eschatology was at least partially borrowed from earlier sources, influencing his apocalypticism, or was it entirely a reflection of the Divine revelation of Christ Himself to his disciples? He not only answered this question, but also conveyed as a golden thread the idea that it was impossible for the authenticity of any message of the apostle to be denied. Paul, or that some copying from Old Testament sources be attributed to their author in exchange for the revealed nature of their origin.
Works of Prof. N.N. Glubokovsky were in their own way not only highly qualified theological works, but also a kind of instant response “to the topic of the day” to the insidious pro-Western trends in theology, implanted in Russia by liberal thinkers.
The idea of contrasting “Paulism,” which excludes the role of revelation in the epistles of St. Paul, the teachings of Christ and the ancient Church are still found in the works of Western theologians, so Glubokovsky’s doctoral dissertation on them has not lost its relevance to this day. Encyclopedic erudition, thoroughness in the selection of information and comprehensiveness of research, good knowledge of Western theological thought, and at the same time rooted in the church - make his research a good source for finding answers to questions that are controversial to this day. For a clearer understanding of the contribution made by Glubokovsky to Russian and world biblical studies, one should consider his works not in the aggregate, but separately, by thematic blocks.
As an excellent exegete and a wonderful biblical scholar, N. N. Glubokovsky left a bright mark on Russian theological scholarship, and the St. Petersburg period was the most significant in his work. He not only contrasted Western biblical scholars with Eastern ones, conducting an apologetic analysis, but also revealed the positive content of the biblical text. In light of the emergence of various trends of critical Protestant schools, which also influenced Russian biblical scholars with their clearly non-Orthodox spirit, it is not surprising why Glubokovsky chose the study of the works of the apostle as his main direction. Paul: there was an acute problem of distorting the theology of St. in the Western manner. ap. Pavel.
With his life, he brought Christianity and science as close as possible, proving that “everything in the world is Christ-centric.” Reflecting already in exile on the causes of the revolution in Russia, he presented a theological and historical analysis of the causes of the tragedy that occurred in Russia and the “significant spiritual Christian prostration” into which the world is increasingly immersed.
About the life of Archpriest Vladimir Strakhov, author of a master's thesis on the second letter of St. ap. Paul to the Thessalonians, much less information has been preserved than about the life and work of N.N. Glubokovsky. This is explained mainly by the onset of the godless period and persecution that affected the scientist. Everything that we can learn about his life has been preserved only in a small archival material located in the Central Archive of the FSB (CA FSB of Russia) on those killed by the Soviet government during the years of repression. However, Strakhov’s creative activity amazes us no less than others with the breadth and scope of the research and sources he involved, as well as the breadth of coverage of various ideas and information about the theology of the apostle. Pavel.
In fact, about Fr. We know Vladimir only from the lists of those who were innocently martyred for their faith in the time of godless power from among the last teachers of the Moscow Theological Academy, compiled by members of the PSTGU teaching corporation, and even then in a very meager form. Even the date of death of the innocently murdered Fr. Vladimir’s identity is not clear: according to official data, he was shot by the NKVD troika in 1937, and according to unofficial data, he remained to live until 1948, when he was released, and, leaving the prison fence, was killed by an unknown person. However, both according to the first data and the second, his death was not free, but violent, which makes us realize that before us is not just an outstanding biblical scholar, but also a martyr for the faith of Christ.
Today Fr. Vladimir Strakhov remains a little-noticeable and little-studied personality, both as a theologian and as a member of the teaching corporation. Also, from 1919 to 1930, he was also the rector of the church in honor of St. Trinity in Listy in Moscow. In 1930 he was awarded the right to wear a miter, and on the 30th of the same month he was tried on false charges of fraud, but was acquitted at trial. Many people met the exhausted sufferer at the courthouse. Archpriest Vladimir also participated in the funeral service for Metropolitan. Hilarion Troitsky in St. Petersburg. (Vladika Hilarion was arrested while staying at Vladimir’s apartment, and died on the way from the Solovetsky camp). Fr.'s family Vladimir provided him with constant assistance during his stay in the Solovetsky camp SLON (Solovetsky camp for special purposes). It is known that the wife of priest Vladimir, mother Ksenia Vladimirovna, helped the exiled clergy a lot.
However, over Fr. Clouds continued to gather for Vladimir. The new arrest of the Shepherd of Christ occurred on March 3, 1931, followed by a three-year exile of the confessor. Initially, a special meeting at the OGPU assigned him the northern region of Russia as his place of exile. However, thanks to the efforts of the priest’s relatives and close people and their petition to the authorities, the place of exile was changed to a milder one. O. Vladimir was first placed in the operetta theater, and later transferred to Ulyanovsk, where he had friends. In Ulyanovsk Strakhov worked on his doctoral dissertation. He also managed to travel to Moscow from time to time. However, in December 1937, 78 clergy were arrested in Ulyanovsk, and among them was Fr. Vladimir, who was arrested immediately after returning from Moscow. All clergy were charged with the crime of collaborating with a fictitious organization of monarchist counter-revolutionaries. Further in the biography of Fr. Two versions of Vladimir appear: according to the official version, he was shot immediately by the NKVD troika on December 29, 1937, and according to the unofficial version, he was sentenced to exile in a forced labor camp for a period of 10 years. Along with the official version, there is another one, according to which in 1948 Fr. Vladimir was summoned by Patriarch Alexy I to Moscow with the intention of appointing him head of the newly opened Moscow Theological Academy. However, according to the stories of one deacon who spent time with Fr. Vladimir spent many years of his imprisonment; when he came out onto the road after his release, in weakened health, he was shot in the back by one of his former cellmates.
Despite all the horror of repression and the severity of the era he experienced, his scientific activity as a biblical scholar and scientist became very fruitful. From his scientific works the following have reached us: “The eschatological teaching of the second chapter of the second Epistle of St. ap. Paul to the Thessalonians", as well as a review of the work of N. D. Protasov. "St. ap. Paul at the Trial of Festus Agrippa,” published in 1912, And “Word on September 30, the day of remembrance of the fallen mentors and heads of the Academy”. Also important for our study is his eschatological treatise: “Belief in the nearness of the parousia or the second coming of the Lord in early Christianity and among St. ap. Paul" Notes from Fr. Vladimir on the occasion of a trip to the funeral of Archbishop. Hilarion, also the word "On the significance of the personality and work of His Holiness Patriarch Tikhon", also a sermon on the week of the Samaritan woman "About the torment of the soul"(1930) and word "Art and Religion" (1929).
The feat of the cross of a true shepherd and confessor of the faith, as well as a profound biblical scholar of Russia, Rev. Vladimir Strakhov should not be forgotten in future generations of the sons of the Mother Church, as well as those who want to engage in church-scientific research.
In the works of Russian biblical scholars, the eschatological theme is often called the term “parousia”. This topic is covered in both letters to the Thessalonians (1 Thessalonians, 4 - 5 chapters, 2 Thessalonians, chapter 2), but it differs in each of them. Let us consider why the apostle needed to cover the topic in a new way parousia and write their second letter to them, and we will also analyze how the ideas about the degree of closeness of the “parousia” differed in the first and second letters to the Thessalonians.
It should be noted that after the writing of the first letter, the Thessalonians began to have new questions regarding the end of the world and the Day of Judgment, which required the apostle to give them a clearer explanation of his understanding of eschatology. But the main reason must be that someone sent them some kind of forged message, as if on behalf of St. ap. Paul, where it was stated that the Coming of Christ has already come or is coming (2 Thess. 2: 1 - 2). Prof. discusses this. prot. V.N. Strakhov, the same topic concerns Prof. N.N. Glubokovsky. This is what prompted the “teacher of languages” to compose a second letter to them, where the Christian view of the fate of the dead and eschatological events would be more clearly presented.
The main difference in the coverage of the eschatological theme in the second epistle to the Thessalonians compared to the first is that in the first epistle of St. Paul indirectly speaks of the parousia as a soon-coming event, and in the second he tries to avoid expressions that indicate the proximity of the parousia and focuses on indicating the signs and incidents preceding it. So, St. Paul lists the following series of signs of the Savior's appearance into the world in the following sequence:
- Before the coming of the Lord, there must appear retreat and open yourself to the man of sin;
- Potentially, his coming is possible, because... this is favorable the mystery of lawlessness;
- But something prevents this from happening holding(or even someone holding);
- The appearance of the wicked can only happen if holding will be taken from the environment;
- When holding factor will be taken from the environment, then the man of sin will be revealed, and appear, under the influence of Satan, with all sorts of signs and lying wonders, in order to deceive people, while some apostasy will cause a certain spirit of error to appear among people, and this everything is not without the will of God, so that many will willingly believe lies, for they have not accepted love and truth for your salvation;
- When will he appear? lawless then the time must come for the Coming of the Lord Christ, who will strike (kill) the lawless one with the breath of His mouth and He will destroy with the revelation of His coming.
As can be seen, by introducing the events that await the coming of the Savior into the world, such as: the appearance of the Antichrist, the falling away from the faith, the trampling and desecration of the temple of God, the apostle protects the Thessalonians from heretical ideas introduced by the forged message.
Thus, in his first letter the apostle clearly indicates the imminence of the Savior’s coming into the world: “You have turned from idols...to look for the coming of His Son from heaven...to deliver us from the wrath to come.”(1 Thess. 1:10). Elsewhere in the first letter we find the passage: "we are living ( now - Author. ), remaining until the coming of the Lord... along with them(deceased - Author) We will be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, and so we will always be with the Lord.”(1 Thess. 4 16-18). These thoughts became a reason for the Thessalonians to think that the Day of the Lord was not a distant event in the future, which is why they began to confuse the Christian community. Also, a consequence of this misunderstanding was that they began to believe that those who died before the coming of the Lord (the second) would not be in the Kingdom of Heaven (1 Thess. 4:16).
In the second letter, the topic of eschatology is illuminated as an event that will be preceded by a series of signs “in heaven and on earth”: “We pray you... do not rush to waver in your mind and be confused... as if the day of Christ is already coming”(2 Thess. 2:1-2), which is revealed in the second letter to them. The mistake of their misunderstanding is associated with the imminent expectation of the end of the world. " That day- the apostle further writes, - will not be accomplished until the one who is now holding back is taken from the environment"(2 Thess. 2:7). And although “the mystery of iniquity is already at work”, “restraining” the Antichrist does not allow him to come into the world before the allotted time (2 Thess. 2.6-7), and that day itself remains unknown to all creation: “But about that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but only My Father alone.”(Matthew 24:36).
The idea of the Savior’s imminent coming to the World is found not only in St. Paul, but also in the eschatological passages of the three Synoptic Gospels and in the revelation of St. John the Theologian. Thus, after the prophecies about the fall of Jerusalem, the Lord begins to talk about the events of the appearance of the Antichrist, without giving any indication of their accomplishment in the time period. He also indirectly indicates the proximity of His coming: “...so, when you see all this, know that it is close, at the door. Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things are done.”(Matt. 24, 33-34). At St. Evangelist Luke also does not indicate that parousia will occur in a relatively distant time period: the evangelist first writes about the destruction of Jerusalem in the 70th year of the 1st century: “...the days will come in which from what you see here, not one stone will be left on another; everything will be destroyed", and then predicts events relating to apocalyptic times: “Beware that you are not deceived, for many will come in My name, saying that I am the one...” and further (Luke 21:8-11). It is interesting that the Savior himself directly tells the disciples that "that time is near" ( Luke 21:8), without specifying whether the time is close, associated with the destruction of Jerusalem or with the appearance of Antichrists, wars and natural disasters. John the Theologian also writes: "Come Lord Jesus"(Rev. 22:20). Apparently, the apostles could not discern that Christ was telling them about events that were about to happen at different historical times. But the Savior himself did not make this distinction, which led to such a perception among his disciples.
The views of two biblical scholars - prof. prot. V.N. Strakhov and prof. N.N. Glubokovsky on the eschatology of St. Pavel. They agree on some things and disagree on others.
The problems of understanding the second coming of the Lord Jesus Christ among the Thessalonians are revealed both in what we are studying and in the work of Prof. prot. V. Strakhov, and in the study of prof. N. Glubokovsky.
The uniqueness of the Antichrist and the indication of the future fulfillment of these prophecies is proven by the Holy Scripture itself:
- the Antichrist will show miracles (“does great signs, so that fire comes down from heaven to earth before people” - Rev. 13:13);
- seal with the number “666”, without which it will not be possible to carry out trade relations (« everyone... will receive a mark on their right hand or on their forehead, and that no one will be able to buy or sell except the one who has this mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. …His number is six hundred and sixty-six” - Rev.13:16-18);
- disasters, wars, destruction, and natural disasters that will occur ( « Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom; there will be great earthquakes in places, and famines, and pestilences, and terrible phenomena, and great signs from heaven» - Luke 21:10-11) and other harbingers of the coming of the false Christ.
- There is no indication of a plurality of Antichrists, but of a specific person (« And I saw another beast coming out of the ground."- Open 13.11).
Since none of the above has happened in human history, church-historical approach cannot be accepted for consideration. Otherwise, in his opinion, we will have to reject the truth of the words of the Gospel.
On the other hand, Prof. N.N. Glubokovsky is inclined towards the followers of the dogmatic theory, who believed that the apostolic apocalypticism was built to a greater extent on the revelation of Christ, either to his disciples or to the apostle himself. Paul in a personal vision. Although Glubokovsky does not reject some shadow of Jewish views, he does not see any special influence on them on the views of the apostle. Pavel. In order to accept or reject the presence of this dependence, it is necessary to understand what Old Testament ideas about the Antichrist could - if this is indeed the case - prevail.
Despite the extreme closeness of the eschatology of St. Paul to the Gospel apocalyptic passages in the conversation of the Lord with the disciples of all three evangelists, we can also prove the influence of Old Testament ideas on the latter. Yes, at app. Paul there are some indications of the events of recent times, which we do not find in the Gospel. Thus, in the Gospel there is no exact indication of the coming into the world of one Antichrist, and his entry into the temple of God is not spoken directly, but only figuratively: when you see the abomination that makes desolate standing in the holy place.”(Matt. 42:15).
Strakhov is taken as a comparison of eschatological places available in St. Paul with passages from the Old Testament, and comes to the conclusion that there is some semantic similarity. Indeed, it is present. Thus, the behavior of the wicked kings Darius, Antiochus Epiphanes, and Emperor Caligula are similar in many ways to the description of the image and behavior of the future Antichrist, and many principles of action in both cases are synonymous: self-deification, desecration of Christian shrines, persecution of Christians, etc. On this occasion, Prof. prot. V.N. Strakhov provides his own system of proof of the certain influence of Jewish traditions on the views of St. ap. Pavel.
To do this, he uses two approaches: philological, in which he notes which words of the Old Testament prophets are repeated in the epistle of St. Paul and semantic, attempting to discover similarities in meaning in Old Testament and New Testament eschatological passages. Yes, Prof. V.N. Strakhov notes that both the Old Testament and New Testament books use the words « ’ αποστασία » (2 Thess. 2, 3 and 1 Macc. 11:14), «ὁ άνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας» (2 Thess. 2.3 and Ps. 88.23) and some other eschatological concepts, which thereby indicates the dependence of the eschatology of St. Paul from pre-Christian prophecies, and the presence of a definite article before the eschatological concepts of the second letter to the Thessalonians that we are examining ( «ὁ άνθρωπος τῆς ἀνομίας», «ἡ ἀποστασία», «τὸ κατέχον» And «ὁ κατέχων») indicates the already existing awareness of Thessalonians with these concepts from earlier sources. He also draws attention to the fact that ap. Paul directly uses the expression "You know"(2 Thess. 2:6) speaking about the signs of the end of the world, which, it should be assumed, the Thessalonians already knew about.
Speaking on the philological analysis of the origin of eschatology. Paul, Glubokovsky notes that the author, “using only a philological scale, exaggerated the “Old Testament coloring.” Otherwise, he notes that there were other important factors that contributed more directly and powerfully to linguistic originality (2 Thess.).
Having analyzed passages from the Gospel telling about the end times, one can notice how the Lord Himself more than once refers to Old Testament sources during a conversation with the disciples about the end times, but at the same time uses them only as a prototype of pre-apocalyptic events. Thus, the Evangelist Matthew mentions how the Lord quotes the prophecy of Daniel: He will appear "the abomination of desolation, spoken through the prophet Daniel, standing in a holy place" (emphasis mine - N.S.)(Matt. 42:15). There is a similar passage in Mark - Mk. 13.14. Elsewhere, Christ compares the times of the second coming with the era of Noah during the flood and Lot during the destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah: “And as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be in the days of the Son of Man: they ate, they drank, they married, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all. ... so it will be on the day when the Son of Man appears"(Luke 17:26-30).
Regarding the issue of possible borrowing of the apocalypticism of the apostle. Paul from the Old Testament ideas of Fear allows them, but they do not claim a higher role for him than the revelation of the Savior. So, in one place he writes that “on the development of the eschatology of St. Paul... a great influence was probably exerted by the most ancient Christian prophets", by which he means Agabus, Judas and Silas, as well as some others who “in turn, they were dependent ... on the prophecies of the Old Testament, especially the book of St. Daniel”. Thus, Strakhov admits that on ann. Paul was influenced by the Old Testament view of eschatology. However, the word "probably" makes the whole conclusion somewhat unproven. A little further, Strakhov more thoroughly argues that "ap. Paul created it ( eschatological doctrine - S.N.) based on a rich legend", but emphasizes the importance of , “what exactly does the app take? Paul is from this tradition, and what are you throwing away as garbage?.
Thus, towards the end of his research, Strakhov draws his final opinion on the issue of borrowing. Strakhov comes to understand that all the Old Testament information about the coming of the false messiah: “neither Old Testament prophecies and psalms, nor modern historical events, nor apocryphal literature could provide the apostle with complete material for depicting the Antichrist" He emphasizes that “such an independent religious thinker-prophet as St. Paul, would not have taken anything from the ancient ideas if he had not been confirmed and confirmed in them by the events and experiences of his inner life, by his personal religious experience.”(compare 1 Cor. 11:23; Gal. 1:11; 2 Cor. 12:1-4).
Another proof in favor of the Divine revelation of eschatology by St. Paul's coming from Christ is, according to Strakhov, an excerpt from the letter to Timothy, where the apostle exhorts his disciple to abstain from Jewish fables (1 Tim. 1:4; 2 Tim. 4:4) and to preserve the received "sacred scriptures" ("ἱερὰ γράμματα"), by which we should understand the revelation of Christ. All this shows us, according to Strakhov, the attitude of the ap. to Old Testament judgments as fables, not confirmed by the truth and often vague and unclear.
According to Glubokovsky, in the Jewish contemplations of the 1st century there was only an idea “a collective anti-messiah for the totality of the enemies of Jehovah and the people of GodAndI". He says that Strakhov has no clarification “nor the correlation of factors in their special analysis and disclosure of the methods, nature or degreeAndJewish-apocalyptic influences". For example, he notes that Rev. V. Strakhov says that the image "a man of lawlessness" can only be fully understoodbased on Jewish circulation", taken from the book of the prophet Daniel, in which there was a prophecy not at all about the Antichrist, but about Antiochus Epiphanes, and from this it would be illiterate to conclude that the ap. This is what Paul used to prophesy about the Antichrist. Thus, Strakhov’s “Old Testament coloring” is unnecessarily exaggerated, as Glubokovsky writes, who, “speaking about the similarity of some concepts among St. Paul with the Old Testament, does not fully explain the Paulinistic linguistic features of 2 Thess, ... about which the latter says much less and is paler.”. We can agree with Glubokovsky’s criticism on this issue.
Confirming the weakness in the degree of dependence of the teachings of St. Paul from the Jewish idea of eschatology, Glubokovsky states that in no historical monuments is there any information about the second coming of the Messiah into the world or the appearance of the Antichrist before the Second Coming of Christ. He considers the only two exceptions to be the following two passages from the Old Testament - the 8th chapter from the book of the prophet Daniel and the 5th and 6th chapters from the 3rd book of Ezra, which provide a description of the personality of the Antichrist, very similar to the New Testament revelation. Here are quotes from these texts: “a king will arise, impudent and skilled in deceit”(Dan. 8:23) and “Then will reign the one whom those who live on earth do not expect...”(3 Esdras 5.6).
In addition to references to the Old Testament, Glubokovsky also draws attention to some extra-biblical sources, where he finds prophecies about the end of times, and they also contain the concept of a single image of the “man of lawlessness.” This is how the Antichrist is called in the prophetic Sibylline books. "Beliar, who will perform great signs, even raising the dead, and will seduce many Jews and wicked people, but by the will of the great God will ultimately be burned along with his followers". However, although this description is similar to the description of the Antichrist in the New Testament, and in particular with the passage from the epistle of St. Pavla: “the coming of [the Antichrist – S.N.], by the action of Satan, will be with all power and signs and lying wonders”- 2 Thess. 2:9), but perhaps it concerned not the Antichrist himself (apocalyptic), but other “apostates” (according to Glubokovsky, the Sibylline books contained a prophecy about Simon the Magician), as in the book of the prophet Daniel - about Antiochus Epiphanes.
Regarding the concept Antichrist, the opinion of the holy fathers, highlighted by prof. prot. V. N. Strakhov in the dogmatic point of view. Starting with sschmch. Irenaeus of Lyon, we see the development of the idea of the Antichrist, but it did not go far beyond the scope of Holy Scripture. Yes, sschmch. Irenaeus thought of him as an enemy of the human race, who wished to deliberately harm man, starting with the appearance of the first people. At first he acted as a tempter, tempting Eve with a forbidden fruit, but in the future he will use the same method, but in the form of “installing” the Antichrist as the sole ruler for all humanity. The question remains, who will he be - a man or some other creature? Almost all the Church Fathers (except Pelagius and Cornelius a-Lapide) have a common opinion on the issue of the Antichrist. As Strakhov writes, even in Origen, who tends to mystify, the Antichrist appears in the form of a specific individual, and not the devil. The following evidence is provided to support this:
- In the message we are examining, St. Paul writes that he "will work by the power of Satan"(“κατ’ ἐνέργειαν τοῦ Σατανᾶ”) (2 Thess. 2:5), which excludes the possibility of the satanic origin of the Antichrist.
- The devil cannot repeat the act of Christ because he has no power before the Almighty Creator. St. John of Damascus writes: “It is not the devil himself who will become a man, just as the Lord became man, let it not be! But a man will be born from fornication and will take upon himself all the actions of Satan.”.
- According to legend, the Old Testament allegorically indicates that the Antichrist will come from the last of the 12 Jewish tribes - the tribe of Dan, therefore, he will be a man. We learn about this indirectly in several places in Scripture. Thus, in the book of Genesis we read: “Dan will be a serpent on the road, an adder on the way, biting the horse’s leg, so that his rider will fall backward.”(Gen. 49, 17). And in Deuteronomy Dan is presented as “young lion”, “lying in wait for its prey”(Deut. 33:22). This speaks both of his special physical strength and belligerence, but also, according to many, of his cunning. So, Samson, being from the tribe of Dan, was strong even to tear the lion’s mouth. In another place in the Holy Scriptures it is said about Dan that from him "The whole earth trembles" and that he “He will destroy the earth and everything that is in it, the city and those who live in it”(Jer. 8:16). An interesting fact is that the name of the tribe of Dan is not found in the list of 144,000 chosen souls from the Apocalypse (Rev. 7:4).
Glubokovsky notices from Strakhov that in his understanding the personality of the tsar is very close to the Antichrist, from which he concludes that he is inclined to imagine the Antichrist as a political leader, for example, some kind of Roman emperor.
Speaking about the views of scientists on the origin of the Antichrist, Strakhov draws conclusions about the inadmissibility of the Jewish origin of the Antichrist, but he argues that the latter must be a pagan, since “all iniquity comes from the pagan world”, connecting him with the pagan king Antiochus Epiphanes. He refers to a prophecy from the book of Daniel (Dan. 11), where the prophet Daniel predicts the apostasy and persecution that will be caused by a certain king who "in his anger" will supply an army and “he will defile the sanctuary of power, he will put an end to the daily sacrifice, and he will set up the abomination that makes desolate” And "will exalt himself above all". This came true on Antiochus Epiphanes. Also, these conclusions are drawn based on the words of the message that he “will resist and exalt himself above everything that is called God or shrine"(2 Thess. 2:4). Etymologically analyzing the Greek words “ανομια” - "resistance to God" and σέβασμα – "shrine" he claims that the Antichrist cannot be a Jew.
Glubokovsky objects to Strakhov that “ανομια” is too broad a concept of paganism, rather going beyond its limits, and denoting general opposition to God’s entire order of things, and also “moral debauchery” than pure idolatry. It is also outrageous that such assumptions are made about the origin of the Antichrist, which are not found anywhere in the text of the message, as well as in the entire Bible. We can glean this information only from certain hints in the Holy Scripture itself or from prophecies and Church Tradition. The first include the prophecy of Patriarch Jacob about Dan, taken from the book of Genesis: “Dan will be a serpent on the road, an adder on the way, biting the horse’s leg, so that his rider will fall backward. I hope for Your help, Lord!”(Gen. 49, 17-18), which confirms the Jewish origin "chief apostate" and in this case it does not play in favor of what V.N. proposed. Strakhov. Also equally important may be a similar prophecy from the book of vice in Jeremiah: “From Dan you can hear the snoring of his horses, from the loud neighing of his stallions the whole earth trembles; and they will come and destroy the land and everything that is in it, the city and those living in it.”(Jer. 8, 16-17).
Prof. N.N. Glubokovsky, analyzing the concept of Antichrist, considers two concepts - humanitarian And supranatural. According to the first of them Antichrist will be an ordinary person, and according to the second, he will have some special abilities, as if in imitation of Christ, who worked miracles, but the miracles he performs will only be an illusion in the eyes of people, but not a real miracle (2 Thess. 2:9). According to the second of them, Antichrist– will be the demon himself. This theory, as Glubokovsky writes, became dominant as a result of the influence of Babylonian mythology. After the year 50, as Glubokovsky writes, there is a tendency to identify the Antichrist with the Emperor Nero (the so-called Nero legends), who was possessed by a demon. Since they are not traced in the message, this proves that the message itself was written before the accession of Nero (October 54 AD) and the appearance of this theory itself. Paul’s consciousness, notes Glubokovsky, brings him closer to his era, and “we observe a coincidence of trends in Christian society and the thoughts of Paul outlined in the second chapter”. Thus, Glubokovsky himself believes that the Antichrist will be more likely a human being who has completely subjugated himself to Satan, than the very embodiment of the evil spirit.
The holy fathers also thought about the Antichrist in the same way. Yes, St. Hippolytus of Rome, St. Irenaeus of Lyons, the church writer Victorinus, and others, based on the message we are examining, as well as the texts from Scripture we mentioned, conclude that a man of lawlessness who enters the Holy of Holies and defiles it will really be a person, while allegorically their understanding is rejected.
In the ancient Greek-Russian dictionary of Dvoretsky there are even more than 25 of them, among which there are such meanings as “keep”, “guard”, “detain” and so on. As a result, according to Glubokovsky, this verb cannot be understood exactly as "to create a disturbance", "to rebel against public authority", as it suggests to understand Strakhov in the second time used verb « κατέχειν ». In Strakhov, this verb can denote both a person holding something back from the coming of the Antichrist, and a person, on the contrary, creating hindrances and chaos for his coming. The ambiguity of Strakhov’s thoughts arouses the indignation of Glubokovsky, who concludes that the introduction of new concepts by Strakhov “creates unnecessary difficulties for the interpretation of other important details.”
In relation to the patristic tradition of understanding the verb « κατέχειν " majority of them believe that the first concept “τὸ κατέχον” should mean the existing Roman Empire, and the second – “ὁ κατέχων” - its emperor, who with his power and might was, as it were, the force that prevented the emergence of some other king, and here - the Antichrist.
Strakhov believes that, despite the fact that this construction is very logical, upon closer examination a misunderstanding arises: if this empire itself was a persecutor of Christians, then how can it be considered the same “restrainer”? Is she not rather a catalyst for the phenomenon of the “man of lawlessness”? It was not for nothing that many considered Nero to be the Antichrist who had already appeared, and later this definition was extended to all other Roman emperors - persecutors of Christians. The Roman Empire, filled with the lawlessness of paganism and the despotism of the ruling power, could not, in fact, be a guarantor protecting the world from the Antichrist. It seems that the arrival man of lawlessness into a pagan state would be more realistic than into a Christian one. Strakhov himself is inclined to think that the concept « τό κατεχόν » like something "holding" consists in a certain determination of God not to allow the kingdom of Antichrist until the appointed time of the end of the century and rather indicates state power, and “ὁ κατέχων” ( holding)- to its representatives.
It is interesting that over time, after the fall of the Roman Empire under the invasion of the Goths, the concept "holding" began to crystallize on the image of a Christian state, first Byzantium, then Russia, which is often expressed by modern Orthodox publicists in Russia.
Regarding the concept temple, in which the Antichrist will sit, like God, pretending to be God"(2 Thess. 2:4) the original meaning should be clarified for a more complete understanding. Strakhov writes that since the Antichrist will appear to the Jews who are waiting for him, who saw him as the Messiah, he assumes that the “man of lawlessness,” having made himself king, will sit in the most sacred place for them - the recreated Jerusalem Temple, in order to attract more of them to himself. Thus, Strakhov allows for a literal understanding of the expression used by Ap. Pavel. However, if this is allowed, then the Antichrist will never be able to desecrate the Temple of Jerusalem; this temple itself is in no way a Christian church, but is only thought of as "the center of all religious and political public life" Jews
Glubokovsky believes that the expression "he will sit in the temple of God"(2 Thess. 2:4) must be understood only figuratively, figuratively. He sees this process as an atheistic attempt to suppress Christianity with a new religion, therefore he concludes that here “there is no need to understand the Christian Church in a material sense”.
Among the holy fathers, the majority, as noted by Prof. V.N. fears, are of the opinion that under temple should be understood "spiritual temple of Christianity" How did the St. think about it? Irenaeus of Lyon, Blessed. Augustine, St. John Chrysostom, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Blessed. Theodoret of Cyrus and Icumenius. They refuted the idea of the literal entry of the Antichrist into the Jerusalem Temple, since there is no mention of this anywhere in the Holy Scriptures. Image associations are common temple with the image of a woman who fled into the desert from the beast that was pursuing her, which is discussed in the book of Revelation of St. John the Evangelist (Rev. 12:6). In the light of this understanding, Glubokovsky is largely an exponent of the opinion of these holy fathers.
Obvious similarities in the description of the accession of the Antichrist to the temple can be observed with the book of Revelation of John the Theologian: “And a mouth was given to him speaking proudly and blasphemously... And he opened his mouth to blaspheme God, to blaspheme His name and His dwelling, and living in heaven. And they will bow to him all those who live on the earth whose names are not written in the book of life..."(Rev. 13:5-8) (emphasis mine – N.S.). Although it does not openly talk about the desecration of the temple in Jerusalem, the fact of the personal direct entry of the Antichrist into it as a prototype of the holy Old Testament temple of Solomon, in which the Spirit of God dwelt, fits well into this narrative.
In views about the personality of the Antichrist, the majority of the holy fathers think of him as a specific individual, while they deny the allegorical understanding. Strakhov politicizes the Antichrist, presenting himself as a kind of political anarchist, and a pagan origin is attributed to him (since “all evil is from the pagan world”). For Glubokovsky, the Antichrist is not necessarily a pagan personality. He points out in Strakhov’s work his too much reliance and emphasis on philological analysis, which may not always lead to true results. Instead, Glubokovsky tries to take into account biblical traditions, in connection with which the Antichrist may be from the tribe of Dan and, accordingly, of Jewish origin. It is characteristic that Glubokovsky also understands historical opinions about the Antichrist. So, many saw Nero under him, but this cannot be discussed in the message, since the imp. Nero reigned after the 50th year, and the second letter to the Thessalonians was composed before him.
Regarding the concept temple, in which the Antichrist "he will sit as God, showing himself to be God"(2 Thess. 2.4) - as the apostle writes. Paul - both biblical scholars contain some distinctive features in a number of details. While agreeing in general terms that the Antichrist will damage Christianity, as a result of which holy temples may be desecrated by him, each of them imagines the temple itself differently. Strakhov dares to admit that it can be thought of as a real physical structure - like the very temple that will be erected in Jerusalem on the site of the one built by King Solomon and destroyed in the 70s. according to R.H. by the Romans. At Glubokovsky's temple is understood very figuratively - this is a meeting of believers who were seduced by the person of the Antichrist, for the Lord warns that the Antichrist, when he comes, will try miracles, although false, but bright and impressive, "to seduce... and the chosen ones"(Mark 13:21). Thus, according to Glubokovsky, through the acceptance by some of the apostate believers of the teachings of the Antichrist, any temple in which these people receive the messenger of Satan will be desecrated.
On the one hand, Glubokovsky is objectively right in convicting Strakhov of his incorrect interpretation of the concept temple, for even if the Temple of Jerusalem were rebuilt before the end of all, it could in no way be considered Christian. Glubokovsky also questions the Jewish traditions about this event, since in the face of the Holy Scriptures, which do not directly talk about this anywhere, they have little weight. Strakhov’s position also cannot be rejected. They rightly note that the Antichrist, with his accession to the temple built by the Jews on the site of Solomon, will “touch” and affect the most important, the most sacred thing on which the faith of modern Jews is based - faith in the coming Messiah. Therefore, with this act, the Antichrist will be able to attract the largest number of Jews and the world intelligentsia, who will see in him the coming deliverance from troubles and wars. The Holy Fathers thought about this in two ways.
Eschatological questions, one way or another, will concern the entire Christian world and all of humanity until the end of time.