Do they want it to mean that?

[traillius]

I’ve often heard of non-catholic preachers, including having seen several videos of actual cases of, interpreting the book of revelations as pertaining to the Catholic Church. I disagree, not just because I am catholic. Mostly I disagree, because that takes the book out of context, almost completely. The beast, the harlot, and the antichrist, are Ancient Pagan Rome, its emperors, and agents. Any other meaning must be what those people want it to mean, despite ignoring the context in which it was written. But it could be they want it to mean the RCC. I only want it to mean ancient pagan rome, because I don’t see how it could possibly refer to anything else, if taken in context. My motive is discerning the correct meaning. I wonder what their motives are. Oh, and I heard a preacher once say that Pontifex meant pope. He should study Latin. ( I did for four years. Pontifex=Bridge Builder. )

 

[MarcoPolo]

Unfortunately, the Bible is often a Rorschach blot for what dwells in the minds of the reader.

 

[DihydrogenOxide]

Unfortunately, the Bible is often a Rorschach blot for what dwells in the minds of the reader.

Agreed.

Those groups that separated themselves from the Catholic Church will always tend to feel they have to find a means of explaining why we are “evil” to make themselves seem righteous for separating from the One True Faith.

Note that we don’t do the same for them, but rather want them to come back into the fold.

 

[Jim_Dandy]

It’s absurd for Protestants to interpret Revelation – or any Scripture – as being critical of the Church. Since the Catholic Church discerned which writings are the inspired Word of God and compiled the Bible, do you think it’s likely that the Church included a book critical of herself? The Church selected only those writings that mirrored her teaching. Writings that did not conform to the Church’s teaching were rejected. The Church did not come out of the Bible; the Bible came out of the Church. The New Testament reflects the teaching of the Church, not vice versa.

Protestants have an interpretation problem. They twist the Scriptures to make them say whatever they wish. This is not new. It was being done even in the days of the Apostles.

“There are some things in them [St. Paul’s letters] hard to understand, which the ignorant and unstable twist to their own instruction, as they do the other Scriptures” 2 Peter 3:16. “Other Scriptures” refers to what the Church named the “Old Testament.”

Jim Dandy
Former Protestant

 

[bmullins]

They miss a lot of the symbolism by getting as far as seeing Rome as the symbol that John was pointing at. Then they immediately jump from there, to Rome… that’s where Catholics are! Oh Rome! Oh Catholics! Oh! Oh!

If it is a future event, which I have come to doubt after much study(but eh with God you never know), the future Rome would not necessarily be ‘Rome’ but a city like Rome where the cult of the Emperor was reestablished. Where God was not worshiped, but the leaders of the city. (That is why most evangelicals declare that we worship the Pope as God, not because of anything we’ve taught but because it fits their interpretation.)

It also points to Rome destroying the city where the Messiah was killed, which would be Jerusalem. (In AD 70 that happened.) That’s how I interpret it now, that John had a vision of the temple being destroyed, and warned people about ti.

 

[bmullins]

I’ve spent the morning discussing Revelation actually, on a Facebook group. There is a Seventh Day Adventist trying to scare some young people who have just come to Christ by telling them that the ‘Seal of God’ is the Sabbath, and that anyone who worships on Sunday is sealed by the Devil. sigh

 

[rdscheirer]

See Scott Hahn’s great work and interpretation of Revelation - it is a recreation of the Mass for Catholics - it is probably aposostasy to the protestants- grew up Lutheran - last visit with parents finally told them YES I’M CATHOIC - wife was raised Catholic- children were baptizied- Deacon who helped me had also been raised Lutheran. He said not that much difference between the two.