G
- Status
L
losh14
Guest
Hey A burger,
I’m going to clarify myself first and ask for a few points of clarification from you.
Now, you know that the Catholic Church favors Jerome and Augustine over Ephraem on this point, and I think there is more than not liking Ephraem’s perspective. For one, there is a matter of reputation of scholarship. Jerome was renowned for translating Scripture into Latin and seen as an expert on Biblical studies. Augustine was renowned for his scholarship, both in thoroughness and in research, and was known foremost as a rhetor. Ephraem is foremost remembered as a hymnist. There is also a matter of influence - Augustine’s connection to what was then (prior to the Muslim onslaught) the Catholic center of Hippo gave him more visibility than Ephraem’s post, and as such Ephraem is venerated by the Eastern churches but not in the Latin Rite. Lastly, Augustine wrote so authoritatively on such a wide swath of theology that for nearly 1000 years he was the definitive expert against whom other theories (even preceeding ones) needed to be compared.
You are correct to point out that Ephraem’s writings came earlier than Jerome’s or Augustine’s. But Ephraem was a Syrian deacon and his influence was not felt as strongly as Jerome’s (a priest who had a mandate from the Pope to write the Vulgate) or as Augustine’s (bishop of Hippo and participant in the Synod). Lastly, Ephraem’s earlier date of writing is only part of what is needed - the other is adoption. Can you find bishops in the early Church who adopted Ephraem’s writings over Augustine’s or Jerome’s? If there are not, or if these were discontinued, we cannot say that Ephraem’s was the consistent teaching of the early Church.
I’m going to clarify myself first and ask for a few points of clarification from you.
Yes, you did, and Ephraem (or Pseudo-Ephraem) wrote this. Note that it doesn’t impugn Ephraem’s writings for someone to have written them in his name - Paul’s letters to Timothy are believed to have a pseudo write them. This was just the accepted practice in the day for preserving or paraphrasing oral tradition.
Now, you know that the Catholic Church favors Jerome and Augustine over Ephraem on this point, and I think there is more than not liking Ephraem’s perspective. For one, there is a matter of reputation of scholarship. Jerome was renowned for translating Scripture into Latin and seen as an expert on Biblical studies. Augustine was renowned for his scholarship, both in thoroughness and in research, and was known foremost as a rhetor. Ephraem is foremost remembered as a hymnist. There is also a matter of influence - Augustine’s connection to what was then (prior to the Muslim onslaught) the Catholic center of Hippo gave him more visibility than Ephraem’s post, and as such Ephraem is venerated by the Eastern churches but not in the Latin Rite. Lastly, Augustine wrote so authoritatively on such a wide swath of theology that for nearly 1000 years he was the definitive expert against whom other theories (even preceeding ones) needed to be compared.
You are correct to point out that Ephraem’s writings came earlier than Jerome’s or Augustine’s. But Ephraem was a Syrian deacon and his influence was not felt as strongly as Jerome’s (a priest who had a mandate from the Pope to write the Vulgate) or as Augustine’s (bishop of Hippo and participant in the Synod). Lastly, Ephraem’s earlier date of writing is only part of what is needed - the other is adoption. Can you find bishops in the early Church who adopted Ephraem’s writings over Augustine’s or Jerome’s? If there are not, or if these were discontinued, we cannot say that Ephraem’s was the consistent teaching of the early Church.
Good examples, both. We generally say that these were assumed into Heaven, just as we celebrate the feast of Mary’s Assumption, not Mary’s Rapture. You would be correct to say that The Rapture doctrine posits a general assumption of Christians at a specific time.
Kudos for your evangelism! But this is besides the point. Since you have courage and opportunity that not all of us have (if I were to argue for Christ at my job, I’d be fired) I’ll pray for your success in bringing others to the fullness of life in Christ. Let’s keep this on topic, otherwise.
A
a_burger
Guest
You might to read from Yves Dupont. You can Google. According to Dupont, the leading Catholic prophetic, the New Nero will be killed by the Antichrist. For Christians it goes from bad to worse. It is asked for Christians to try to remain strong for those who can’t. We might want to develop a strategy including prayer. Dupont’s reading is very interesting.
S
SHW
Guest
Hi all, 
I just finished a 2-page Scripture Study titled “The Rapture Explained” and if you are interested, it can be read at members.cox.net/studyhisword/RaptureExplained.pdf
Comments welcome.
SHW
I just finished a 2-page Scripture Study titled “The Rapture Explained” and if you are interested, it can be read at members.cox.net/studyhisword/RaptureExplained.pdf
Comments welcome.
SHW
M
MarysGirls
Guest
:yup:Hi all,
I just finished a 2-page Scripture Study titled “The Rapture Explained” and if you are interested, it can be read at members.cox.net/studyhisword/RaptureExplained.pdf
Comments welcome.
SHW
L
losh14
Guest
Kudos for the link.Hi all,
I just finished a 2-page Scripture Study titled “The Rapture Explained” and if you are interested, it can be read at members.cox.net/studyhisword/RaptureExplained.pdf
Comments welcome.
SHW
C
CWBetts
Guest
Thanks! Something else to print out and put in my binder!Hi all,
I just finished a 2-page Scripture Study titled “The Rapture Explained” and if you are interested, it can be read at members.cox.net/studyhisword/RaptureExplained.pdf
Comments welcome.
SHW
L
losh14
Guest
Interesting conjecture - I assume your assertion of an Iran/Iraq origin comes from Dupont’s writings? I don’t have the time at this point to read Dupont (I have a professional exam in gulp 8 days and a 17-day-old daughter who has yet to sleep for more than four hours at a stretch, so I’m a bit thin now).
I think that many Rapture proponents posit a European antichrist as a cohort to other beliefs: either anti-Catholicism (in which case the Antichrist is the Pope or comes from Rome), or isolationism (in which case the UN is held in suspicion). In general, where a doctrine is either poorly or incompletely understood, the thinker’s own background begins to fill in the blanks.
Example: Hal Lindsay often posits Russia to have a profound role in the End Times by taking aggressive action against Israel. I personally believe this comes from Lindsay’s fear of the spread of godless Communism, and perhaps even a melodramatic view of the world (good vs. evil with political incarnations).
Now I’m going to take a few minutes to trounce Lindsay and dispensational eschatology. Please skip if you don’t want to be bored.
Lindsay’s justification? Conflation of three verses:
Genesis 10:2
Ezekiel 38:2-3
Revelation 20:8
Using the common linkage of “Gog and Magog” in all three verses he assumes personal names become toponyms and makes “Rosh” into Russia, “Meshech” into Moscow and “Tobol” into Tubolsk.
Let’s assume that the “Gog and Magog” in all three are actually places - it is possible that the people mentioned in Genesis (~4000 B.C.) founded kingdoms that became hostile to Israel around Ezekiel’s time (~6th century B.C.) and were either remembered as history or still existed when Revelation was penned (~9th decade A.D.). But most likely, these places were founded and inhabited by ethnic semites and were somewhere in Anatolia (modern Turkey).
Why not Russia?
First, we’re talking 1600+ miles from Moscow to Jerusalem, which would take infantry at least a month if the terrain were flat and easy. But the path is either across the Caucasus mountains and through the territory of Persian and Armenian tribes, or across the Bosporus straits (assuming sufficient navigation abilities, which semitic peoples in 6000 B.C. didn’t have because they didn’t need) and through Anatolian and Thracian territories.
Second, we have no evidence of organized settlement at Moscow or Tobolsk until the 9th and 15th centuries, respectively (and Tobolsk is even farther than Moscow). Not to mention the extreme differences in climate - you’d be hard-pressed to make it as a nomadic pastoralist from the temperate fertile crescent in the hardscrabble steppe of Tobolsk or to endure the long cold winters of Moscow.
Third, the inhabitants of Moscow and Tobolsk are descendants of Varangian, Rus, Kievan, Novogradian and Swedish nomads, all of whom migrated from the north. Their artifacts are functionally and decoratively distinct from semitic artifacts. They spoke Finno-Ugric and Slavic languages that do not resemble (in the least) Semitic languages. While there is some evidence linking most Eurasian civilizations together to a common ancestor in Anatolia (the Proto-Indoeuropean hypothesis), there is no special linkage between the Hebrew, Hittite or Amelkite tribes and the Rus, Varangian and Kievan ethnic groups that suggests purposeful and direct migration.
Fourth, history bears out that the similarities that Lindsay (and others) found are coincidental. The historical record maintains that Moscow was named after the Moskva River on which it sits, and the river’s name comes from a Swedish word meaning “turpid”. It is not until the 17th century that anyone conjectures a link between Russia, Moscow and Tobolsk with Rosh, Meshech and Tobol.
Fifth, presumption of linguistic correctness is the underlying error here. Here you have an American English speaker pronouncing anglicized versions of Aramaic placenames and anglicized versions of Russian placenames and calling them equivalent. Does anyone see a problem with this?
The Russians don’t pronounce themselves “rosh” but rather “rove-skee”.
Moscow isn’t “Mesh-ek” but rather “mosk-va”.
If we suspected linguistic similarities (ie, grammar, syntax, morphology, semantic syllabary) we’d expect to see a systemic consonantal shift from /sh/ to /sk/ between similar words, but we don’t have a long list of syllables with similar meanings to match up, and we don’t have other linguistic similarities.
What’s more likely is that if Gog, Magog, Meshech, Tobol and Rosh are all toponymic (rather than nation names), they exist or existed in Anatolia. That’s marching distance to the lands where Israelites wandered. Similar artifacts, similar languages, similar ethnic phenotypes and genotypes all suggest an underlying cultural link that supports diaspora from a common ancestry.
It could even be that Gog and Magog were long-destroyed cities (as were Sodom and Gomorroah) by the 9th decade A.D. when Revelation was penned, but remained as metaphor for enemies of God (as Sodom and Gomorrah remained as metaphor for lasciviousness) and so would be understood and appropriate within the highly symbolic imagery of the Book of Revelation.
Here, you can have your soapbox back
S
SHW
Guest
The Catholic Encyclopedia has listed some interesting ideas about Gog and Magog.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06628a.htm
My “thanks” to those who have read and/or made comments about my study “The Rapture Explained.” Much appreciated.
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06628a.htm
My “thanks” to those who have read and/or made comments about my study “The Rapture Explained.” Much appreciated.
E
Erchomai_Kyrios
Guest
Hi, alot of posts on the topic and I haven’t even begun to scratch the surface. I’m therefore not sure this hasn’t already been covered but, in the outside chance that it has not, the word “rapture” was actually coined from Jerome’s Latin Vulgate in the first epistle to the Thessalonians. If it has then let me apologize up front.
Jerome-Vulgate:
Rapiemur being a Latin verb meaning to seize or catch up, as a lover.
For other contexts see
Acts 8:39:
And
John 10:28-29:
Compare this with The prophet Isaiah and John’s Revelation and the inferences surrounding the Bridegroom Christ and His Bride the Church. There is great symbolism of course but has anything prepared us for the joy of actually meeting Christ - eye has not seen nor ear heard what God has prepared - therefore there are no analogies that can give us the true sense of the love between Christ and those who are His. However the wedding is the symbol conveyed to us in Scripture.
Scripture:
There has also been commentary in the Early Church Fathers on the Song of Songs - same topic - the Church like a bride swept off its feet
Songs 7:10-13:
May the Spirit of the Lord supply us with Wisdom,
Erchomai Kyrios
C
CWBetts
Guest
We will definitely be caught up with Christ…AT THE VERY END. Christ will not come to save the faithful, and then leave every one else to suffer through a tribulation, and thens again (a third coming???) for the final battle, which then leads to a 1000 year reign and finally coming again (a fourth coming???) for final judement. This is the rediculous fairy tale I am talking about. He will return ONE time, for final judgement, and not before.
E
Erchomai_Kyrios
Guest
Hi CW,
I know we don’t all have the same opinion and I certainly do not profess to know everything - far from it. How would you exegete the 18th chapter of Revelation? What does the chapter mean in terms of your eschatology? Appreciate hearing your view.
Thanks, Erchomai Kyrios
St. John:
C
CWBetts
Guest
Babyllon the Great is not in our future. It is in our past, yet it was in the future of St. John. Babylon the Great was Pagan Rome.Hi CW,
I know we don’t all have the same opinion and I certainly do not profess to know everything - far from it. How would you exegete the 18th chapter of Revelation? What does the chapter mean in terms of your eschatology? Appreciate hearing your view.
Thanks, Erchomai Kyrios
R
ryanoneil
Guest
It can also be argued that Old Covenant Jerusalem (of the first century) is Babylon. The warning to leave lest you share in her plagues (Rev 18:4), echoes Jesus’ warning to flee to the mountains and not turn back because of the tribulation (Mt 24:16-21). Jerusalem was mistaken to think it was impregnable as the original Babylon was before her destruction.
**To the measure of her boasting and wantonness repay her in torment and grief; for she said to herself, ‘I sit enthroned as queen; I am no widow, and I will never know grief.’ (Rev 18:7)
You said, “I shall remain always, a sovereign mistress forever!” But you did not lay these things to heart, you disregarded their outcome. Now hear this, voluptuous one, enthroned securely, Saying to yourself, “I, and no one else! I shall never be a widow, or suffer the loss of my children”-- Both these things shall come to you suddenly, in a single day: Complete bereavement and widowhood shall come upon you For your many sorceries and the great number of your spells; (Isa 47:7-9)**
Another clue is Old Covenant Jerusalem had been “widowed” before, when it was conquered by Babylon. It was described as widowhood because God, her husband, had forsaken her.
Fear not, you shall not be put to shame; you need not blush, for you shall not be disgraced. The shame of your youth you shall forget, the reproach of your widowhood no longer remember. For he who has become your husband is your Maker; his name is the LORD of hosts; Your redeemer is the Holy One of Israel, called God of all the earth. (Isa 54:4-5)
She didn’t realize it at the time, but it happened again five-hundred years later. God turned his back on the aspects of the Old Covenant that were to pass away, because she had rejected God’s Son. Jerusalem had traded the love of a faithful husband for the powerful thrill of a scarlet beast, and she had to face the consequence of her spiritual harlotry.
She did not live up to to her covenantal reponsibility of being a light to the nations- a beacon that pointed them to the true God. All the nations were decieved by her sorcery (Rev 18:23). Instead of telling the truth to the nations (as the Lamb did) Jerusalem decieved them according to the battle strategy of the dragon. In her was found the blood of prophets and of saints (Rev 18:24) So she was destroyed like the original Babylon.
A mighty angel picked up a stone like a huge millstone and threw it into the sea and said: "With such force will Babylon the great city be thrown down, and will never be found again. (Rev 18:21)
And Jeremiah said to Seraiah: When you reach Babylon, see that you read aloud all these words, and then say: O LORD, you yourself threatened to destroy this place, so that neither man nor beast should dwell in it, since it would remain an everlasting desert. When you have finished reading this book, tie a stone to it and throw it in the Euphrates, and say: Thus shall Babylon sink. Never shall she rise, because of the evil I am bringing upon her. (To “weary themselves” are the words of Jeremiah.) (Jer 51:61-64)
Ever since God had chosen and loved His Old Covenant People, they had disregarded His messages. Their rejection had culminated in the Crucifixion of His Son. That is why Old Covenant Jerusalem was being judged.
First the Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. Almost seventy years later, in 132 A.D., the Jewish leaders felt that maybe their exile had been completed. The chief rabbi in Israel proclaimed Simon bar Kochba to be the Messiah. By 136 A.D., Roman soldiers were victorious in Jersalem again, and they completely leveled the city and expelled all Jews. Babylon the great ahd become a haunt of every foul spirit and a haunt of every foul and hateful bird (Rev 18:2)
Kings (18:10), merchants (18:17), and sailors (18:19) mourned the destruction of such a powerful and wealthy trading center (18:11-13) because their cargo was used in the Temple worship. But the saints, apostles, and prophets rejoiced (18:20)
S
SHW
Guest
If there is only one “great city” spoken of in Revelation instead of two, then “Babylon” has to be Jerusalem.
Revelation 11:8 “and their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which is allegorically called Sodom and Egypt, where their Lord was crucified.”
Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem.
Revelation 17:9 “This calls for a mind with wisdom: the seven heads are **seven mountains **on which the woman is seated;”
Pagan Rome sat on seven hills, but Jerusalem sat on seven mountains. Christian Rome’s headquarters sits on the other side of the river on its own hill. It is not part of the seven hills of pagan Rome. Those seven (the Quirinal, Viminal, Esquiline, Caelian, Aventine, Palatine, and Capitoline hills) are located on the east side of the Tiber River. Vatican Hill is located on the west side, but it had not been built yet when Jerusalem was destroyed.
Revelation 17:5-6 "and on her forehead was written a name of mystery: “Babylon the great, mother of harlots and of earth’s abominations.” 6 And I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. When I saw her I marveled greatly. "
Matthew 23:29-31 ""Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the monuments of the righteous,
30 saying, `If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ 31 Thus you witness against yourselves, that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets.
Luke 11:49-51 “Therefore the wisdom of God also said, ‘I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they will kill and persecute,’ 50 that the blood of all the prophets which was shed from the foundation of the world may be required of this generation, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah who perished between the altar and the temple. Yes, I say to you, it shall be required of this generation.”
Revelation 18:23-24 ""Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the monuments of the righteous, 30 saying, `If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ 31 Thus you witness against yourselves, that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets.”
Those of pagan Rome did not kill the prophets. They did kill saints. Those of Jerusalem did kill both prophets and saints (Zechariah) of the Old Covenant and saints (martyrs for Christ) of the New Covenant.
From these Scriptures, it seems that the great city “Babylon” was actually unbelieving, unfaithful “Jerusalem” which also crucified Jesus and it was destroyed in 70 A.D.
If so, then Jerusalem is called spiritually “Sodom, Egypt, and Babylon.” Since the Bible tells the “story” of God’s relationship with His unfaithful Chosen People, the Jews, it seems to me that all of this pertains to the great city Jerusalem which sits on seven mountains and not pagan Rome which sits on seven hills.
Revelation 11:8 “and their dead bodies will lie in the street of the great city which is allegorically called Sodom and Egypt, where their Lord was crucified.”
Jesus was crucified in Jerusalem.
Revelation 17:9 “This calls for a mind with wisdom: the seven heads are **seven mountains **on which the woman is seated;”
Pagan Rome sat on seven hills, but Jerusalem sat on seven mountains. Christian Rome’s headquarters sits on the other side of the river on its own hill. It is not part of the seven hills of pagan Rome. Those seven (the Quirinal, Viminal, Esquiline, Caelian, Aventine, Palatine, and Capitoline hills) are located on the east side of the Tiber River. Vatican Hill is located on the west side, but it had not been built yet when Jerusalem was destroyed.
Revelation 17:5-6 "and on her forehead was written a name of mystery: “Babylon the great, mother of harlots and of earth’s abominations.” 6 And I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. When I saw her I marveled greatly. "
Matthew 23:29-31 ""Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the monuments of the righteous,
30 saying, `If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ 31 Thus you witness against yourselves, that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets.
Luke 11:49-51 “Therefore the wisdom of God also said, ‘I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they will kill and persecute,’ 50 that the blood of all the prophets which was shed from the foundation of the world may be required of this generation, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah who perished between the altar and the temple. Yes, I say to you, it shall be required of this generation.”
Revelation 18:23-24 ""Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the monuments of the righteous, 30 saying, `If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ 31 Thus you witness against yourselves, that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets.”
Those of pagan Rome did not kill the prophets. They did kill saints. Those of Jerusalem did kill both prophets and saints (Zechariah) of the Old Covenant and saints (martyrs for Christ) of the New Covenant.
From these Scriptures, it seems that the great city “Babylon” was actually unbelieving, unfaithful “Jerusalem” which also crucified Jesus and it was destroyed in 70 A.D.
If so, then Jerusalem is called spiritually “Sodom, Egypt, and Babylon.” Since the Bible tells the “story” of God’s relationship with His unfaithful Chosen People, the Jews, it seems to me that all of this pertains to the great city Jerusalem which sits on seven mountains and not pagan Rome which sits on seven hills.
R
ryanoneil
Guest
Josephus recorded the names of the seven hill of Jerusalem: Zion, Acra, Moriah, Bezetha, Millo, Ophel, and Antonio. (Wars of the Jews V, 5:8)
S
SHW
Guest
Thanks for finding this list of the seven mountains of Jerusalem.
“The seven heads are seven mountains, upon which the** woman (whore of Babylon)** sitteth: and** they are seven kings.** 10 Five are fallen, one is, and the other is not yet come: and when he is come, he must remain a short time. 11 And the beast which was and is not: the same also is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into destruction.” Revelation 17:9-11
According to this, the seven “mountains” are actually “kingdoms” and not literal “mountains.” So, the “great city” is most likely Jerusalem where our Lord was crucified. (Revelation 11:8) Pagan Rome is kingdom # 6 (the “one” that “is”). This kingdom “is” in “power” in the Apostle John’s lifetime.
These seven kings are associated with seven kingdoms. Five had already fallen by the Apostle John’s day, Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Media-Persia, and Greece. One king was in power in John’s day, the Emperor of Rome. And the other, the kingdom of the Antichrist, has not yet come.
The “whore of Babylon” does not refer to the “Roman Catholic Church” as many fundamentalist Christians believe and teach. I think the “whore of Babylon” refers to the “powers” of Satan (nations and/or persons) who are against God’s " adopted children" throughout the ages.
E
Erchomai_Kyrios
Guest
“Therefore the wisdom of God also said, ‘I will send them prophets and apostles, and some of them they will kill and persecute,’ 50 that the blood of all the prophets which was shed from the foundation of the world may be required of this generation, 51 from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah who perished between the altar and the temple. Yes, I say to you, it shall be required of this generation.”
Revelation 18:23-24 ""Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for you build the tombs of the prophets and adorn the monuments of the righteous, 30 saying, `If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we would not have taken part with them in shedding the blood of the prophets.’ 31 Thus you witness against yourselves, that you are sons of those who murdered the prophets.”
Those of pagan Rome did not kill the prophets. They did kill saints. Those of Jerusalem did kill both prophets and saints (Zechariah) of the Old Covenant and saints (martyrs for Christ) of the New Covenant.
From these Scriptures, it seems that the great city “Babylon” was actually unbelieving, unfaithful “Jerusalem” which also crucified Jesus and it was destroyed in 70 A.D.
If so, then Jerusalem is called spiritually “Sodom, Egypt, and Babylon.” Since the Bible tells the “story” of God’s relationship with His unfaithful Chosen People, the Jews, it seems to me that all of this pertains to the great city Jerusalem which sits on seven mountains and not pagan Rome which sits on seven hills.
Yes, I too believe there is little doubt the city of spiritual babylon is none other than the earthly Jerusalem. There is an ancient witness that attests to that as well but he lived at least 100 years after the desturction of Jerusalem; which is why I also believe the preterist position is really based on a very weak and fragile foundation. For one point, every ancient writer we know of (e.g such as Justin, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Hippolytus, Origen, Victorinus) speaks of when John wrote this prophecy. And clearly it was post fall of Jerusalem and during the reign of Domitian! If we go to the works of the early church fathers we do not see citations of the Revelation of John in the earlier works such as epistle of Barnabas but they increase as the century turns. It appears clear to me that what John was prophesying was the history of the Church beginning to end and that much of it is spiritual and applicable to many ‘ages’ of the Church. I even think that perhaps Polycarp, the pastor of the church at Smyrna, may have been the angel (in the context of messenger) that brought Johns message to that Church, since he was martyred in 155 AD and stated He had been a Christian for 86 years, having served the Lord. We do not know if he was baptized as a child or as a teen but know he was of a great age when they burned him alive. It is sufficient to say that he became a Christian in 69 AD and was acquainted with the apostle John, as was Papias. The other thing I believe makes the preterist position a weak one in stating this prophecy is past is you only have to read the works of many of these early church fathers from these 7 churches in order to know they do not speak of catastrophic occurences and tribulation that would coincide with John’s language. In fact many of them infer,2nd century as well as third that Revelation was both spiritual and prophetic relative to the future state of the Church. The old wives tales about the alpha numeric lettering of Kaiser Neron = 666 is incorrect as well, so I don’t really see a vestige of truth that they can hang their hat on. Antipas was purportedly martyred in 92 AD and Domitian died in 92 AD so somewhere in between is when John finished the only prophetic book in the New Testament; The Book tells us that,
and
the Son of God:
Now we know Jesus has not come yet so I don’t know about everyone else but I’m going to take both John and the Lord and their word and pay very close attention to this Book. I believe He is near even at the door and so, just as in every other age I too look forward in expectation that His return is soon and do not say my master has delayed His return.
Jesus our Lord & Savior:
This is a very great book and we are very blessed to have it,
May the Lord Bless, Erchomai Kyrios
S
SHW
Guest
I agree. I think that Revelation is a conglomeration of spiritual imagery and actual events; some were already past before John’s Book of Revelation was written, and some are now happening in our own times, and some events will be happening in the future after I am no longer on earth. (There usually are “precursor” events before each “big” event in Scripture.)
The Antichrist (Son of Perdition) will be a man, who is also called the beast in Revelation, and he will murder Enoch and Elijah in Jerusalem according to Catholic prophecy. There have been many precursor Antichrist persons since creation. (1 John 2:18, 1 John 4:3)
It is true that Jesus’ judgment “came” upon Jerusalem in 70 A.D. since He promised that it would “come” upon “this generation,” but Jesus will not return in the flesh (His Second and final Coming) until after Antichrist is defeated. (Matthew 23:29-39; Matthew 24:1-2)
Matthew 24:29-30 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.” (Mark 13:23-27, Acts 1:9-11)
This is proof that the Great Tribulation has not happened yet. Jesus has not returned for His Second Coming “on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.”
A
a_burger
Guest
Prepare for the tribulation. Pray for the rapture. We, the Apostolic Catholics and Christians should prepare for the worst case scenario whether we believe there will be a rapture or not. Social Catholics such as those involved with a Call to Action group will love the Tribulation period when they show their true stripes. It appears there could be a scenario where the Antichrist kills the New Nero of Europe and he will be accepted as the Messiah. Read Yves Dupont a Catholic prophecy expert. Certainly it can not be argued that we will need some spiritual strength. Prepare to be hated. Jesus said let no man deceive you. Protect your inheritance- your salvation through Jesus. It will be a very confusing period.
If you advocate abortions you will love the Tribulation period.
If you advocate abortions you will love the Tribulation period.
- Status