Millenarianism why is is wrong?

[UnknownCloud]

edwinG:

I’m sorry but I don’t appreciate your tone, even if you remind me to ‘walk in love’ at the end of the post. If the Catholic Church is not infallible, does that mean you are? If none of us are infallible, then why is scripture infallible? You are wedging an unfair argument against my position, saying in effect, that because the Church teaches that is the guided by the Holy Spirit and thus protected from officially teaching error as Jesus promised (John 14-17), then for that reason it shouldn’t be trusted? The Bible came from the Church, the Bible didn’t make the Church…you must remember that - it’s a historical and biblical fact.

If the literal interpretation of Scripture worked then why hasn’t it? Yes you read that correctly, it doesn’t make sense.

A debate is an exchange of ideas - you can accept or reject whatever you wish. If you believe what I said about Rev 20 is incoorect, then demonstrate why please.

 

[edwinG]

RNRobert:

Edwin:

However, I find this statement extremely offensive. Exactly what “rules” of the Catholic Church do you consider “bondage?” The ones about chastity? Abortion? Birth control? Marriage? Attending church once a week (see Hebrews 10:25)? Please enlighten me.

Hi RNRobert,
Yes we have been on the same thread many times and I have always read and admired the spirit in which you write, but as you say, our thoughts are frequently opposed. You say you find this statement extremely offensive so please examine which parts offend. I did not write to offend. Obviously I agree with all of the scripture I have read. Yes and I believe in Abraham and Noah etc as historical. Now you know better than I do those beliefs held above and beyond scripture. I dont know many of them at all but more and more keep cropping up. Some months ago, I was shocked to find a brown scapular, now I think I have seen three colours. Are they green and blue , the other colours. I went to one site and it was anti - christ. Is the belief in a piece of material? So if you accept this is it binding? Is the catholic church’s governing body decisions binding on its believers. Where is the Holy Spirit in this? You make judgements. Because of hypocrites you say the Holy Spirit is ineffective and the Roman Catholic church is better at passing on His word. What a big statement. You are denying God’s ability to reach His people. You say the Roman Catholic church is the church but you are wrong. Christ is the church. Those who believe in Him whether Roman Catholic or not are members of the church. I am a member of the church. I am not a Roman Catholic. I am a living, breathing, obedient witness to Christ that one doesn’t have to be Roman Catholic to be acceptable to Christ.
Is attending church once a week a rule? If it is, then I suppose you have sinned if you fail to attend. If that is the case these are man made rules of bondage. Your heart will tell you if you have sinned, you dont need a set of rules listed by a group of men. See Paul on eating meat sacrificed to animals. To one it can be a sin and to another not a sin. Man’s rules are stupid. stupid stupid. No one man is the same as another man. What is good for one is no good for another. I stopped playing golf because I was obsessed with it. That doesnt mean that everyone has to stop playing golf. I havent had a drink of alcohol for about 2 years but that doesnt mean that every one has to stop. Cant you see the freedom in Christ. Any church that gives a list of sins and rules to be obeyed is causing sin amongst its members . And this accusation I make against the Roman Catholic church, IT CAUSES ITS MEMBERS TO SIN.Only the Holy Spirit can tell you, not some man made rules. How I wish you could see how much damage you do to your self. Christ freed you and now you have gone and put your self back under a set of laws. Look at the rules of does and donts regarding Mary. Rules Rules rules.
Again I dont wish to offend you. I want you to LOOK. Be a Christian way above and beyond being a partisan to any cause.
So often I am left feeling hopeless and lost after being here. I read the same old pieces of scripture thrown up and nobody seems to want to know the truth by looking for it in Christ.
Their seems to be a total lack of understanding of God’s love for us. We always read about suffering and sacrifice and the tough rules and works works works. These are true but the order is love first and foremost. The rules are their as guides. He made us, He knows exactly what makes us tick. The rules from Christ often pertain to our psychology. He knows what our minds can bear and cant bear. He knows our limits psychologically. The rules are given in love because He knows the limit of our ability to recover our belief from a sinful position. The rules are not there so He can hit us from time to time, but to save us. He knows our psychological boundaries. Like works. He knows if you go out an do work to please Him, that when you go to Him you take your works with you and this prevents you from the rewards. He needs you empty handed, relying on Him so your self esteem doesnt impede your true love. Your works have to come from your loving and compassionate heart, not from a desire to rack up points. Look at a little child. Does this child every worry about its next feed, or what clothes it will wear. Does it ask for better clothes or more money or anything. Does it require a Nike nappy ( do they make them yet, maybe I should be in management) No , it just enjoys its life and loves its parents and does not worry. A baby trusts its parents implicitly. Does a child work to be loved. No but a child may want to please its father because of love. That is how we are to be with Him.
How He lifts us up when we humble ourselves
May Christ grow strong in you Robert
walk in love
edwinGhttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif

 

[edwinG]

Fidelis:

Actually, it would make more sense to look at what makes one believe that Scripture teaches that there will be a literal 1000 year earthly reign of Christ. The Scriptures are not meant to include a refutation of every erroneous teaching that comes along (and neither is it supposed to serve as an all-inclusive catechism, in the Sola Scriptura sense).

The one specific aspect, scripturally, is that the entire theology of the 1000 year earthly reign is built upon one passage (Revelation 20:2-7). Everything else that is believed about it is pure speculation and eisegesis based on a literal, wooden reading of this number. As has been pointed out, ad teduim, is that 1000 in the Scriptures is a highly symbolic number meaning “lots and lots.” For example, the psalmist says of God, " *For every beast of the forest is mine, the cattle on a thousand hills" *(Psalm 50:10). Does this mean the cattle on hill 1001 does not belong to God? No, we know that God is the God of ALL creation–it all belongs to him.

Hi Fidelis,
I see you have objected to my phrasing :- 1) live and reign with Him for a thousand years. 2) After 1000 years
3) locked up for 1000 years.
So then as I dont want to cause any disputes let me simply quote from Holy Scripture so all can believe what they want to. If you want to believe in lots and lots I have no objection.
Revelation 20:4 “… And the lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.”
Revelation 20:2 " … and bound him for a thousand years 20:3 and cast him into the bottomless pit and shut him up and set a seal on him so that he should deceive the nations no more till the thousand years were finished.
Rev20:5 “…until the thousand years were finished.”
Rev20:6 “. and shall reign with Him a thousand years.
Rev 20:7 Now when the thousand years have expired…”
and let all believe what they want to believe.
Christ be with you
walk in love
edwinGhttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif

 

[edwinG]

UnknownCloud:

edwinG:

I’m sorry but I don’t appreciate your tone, even if you remind me to ‘walk in love’ at the end of the post. If the Catholic Church is not infallible, does that mean you are? If none of us are infallible, then why is scripture infallible? You are wedging an unfair argument against my position, saying in effect, that because the Church teaches that is the guided by the Holy Spirit and thus protected from officially teaching error as Jesus promised (John 14-17), then for that reason it shouldn’t be trusted? The Bible came from the Church, the Bible didn’t make the Church…you must remember that - it’s a historical and biblical fact.

If the literal interpretation of Scripture worked then why hasn’t it? Yes you read that correctly, it doesn’t make sense.

A debate is an exchange of ideas - you can accept or reject whatever you wish. If you believe what I said about Rev 20 is incoorect, then demonstrate why please.

Hi UnknownCloud,
Yes the catholic church is not infallible. Am I ? Why ask this, as it puts you down.Scripture was written by the Holy Spirit, thats why it is infallible.
I am not sure of where you are headed with the church because Roman Catholics use the church when they mean the Roman Catholic church and also when they mean “the church” The church is Christ’s body and the Roman Catholic church is the Roman Catholic church. The church is protected, it is Chirst’s body and this is made of Christ as the head and all christians who believe… No denomination church is infallible.
I guess people like to move in and out of what parts of the bible they take literally. If you want to make a long list of the parts you reject literally I would be pleased to read it, but that is too long a task for me to do.
Yes I agree the bible came from the Church, that is Christ.
Can you repeat what you said about Rev 20 as I can’t find your point of view or for that matter mine that started this line of discussion. It seems to be picked up out of the blue as I did not use quotion marks and a verbatim expression. If you have a different meaning for 1000 years I am not debating this. I just quoted the bible.
Christ be with you
walk in lovehttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif
edwinG

 

[Fidelis]

edwinG:

Hi Fidelis,
I see you have objected to my phrasing :- 1) live and reign with Him for a thousand years]

Actually, I was not objecting to your phrasing (it is right out of the Scripture) but just the erroneous interpretation of a *literal * 1000 years.

Blessings,
fidelis

 

[michaelp]

I am just curious as to how Catholics handle the fact the the early Church, Papias, Irenaeus, etc. all believed in a coming 1000 year millennium. How come you do not see this as part of the deposit of Tradition?

Michael

 

[Contarini]

eople on this thread have given numerous reasons, including the fact that is unbiblical and the Magisterium condemns it.:

But this has been stated rather than proven. I don’t see how anyone could reasonably interpret the condemnation in the Catechism as referring to premillenialism. As I’ve said repeatedly, the view condemned there is exactly the view most passionately condemned by premillenialists. To clainm that this condemns premillenialists makes no sense–I’ve never known a premillenialist who wouldn’t sign off on it enthusiastically (with the possible exception of the phrase “within history”–but as I said earlier, that could mean different things).

In Christ,

Edwin

 

[Fidelis]

eople on this thread have given numerous reasons, including the fact that is unbiblical and the Magisterium condemns it.:

But this has been stated rather than proven. I don’t see how anyone could reasonably interpret the condemnation in the Catechism as referring to premillenialism. As I’ve said repeatedly, the view condemned there is exactly the view most passionately condemned by premillenialists. To clainm that this condemns premillenialists makes no sense–I’ve never known a premillenialist who wouldn’t sign off on it enthusiastically (with the possible exception of the phrase “within history”–but as I said earlier, that could mean different things).

In Christ,

Edwin

You must have missed this post, which is the Church’s position on the type of millenialism which is under discussion It condemns the position in no uncertain terms:

**Decree of the Holy Office dated July 21, 1944: **

“In recent times on several occasions, this Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office has been asked what must be thought of the system of mitigated Millenarianism, which teaches, for example, that Christ the Lord before the final judgment, whether or not preceded by the resurrection of the many just, will come visibly to rule over this world. The answer is: The system of mitigated Millenarianism cannot be taught safely.”

 

[New_Heart]

Posted by edwinG

Shortly, ie Max 12 years until the end of Tribulation. ( So get your self in order) In this period all those people killed in Christ will live and reign with Him for a thousand years. The rest, the vast majority who are killed will go to hell until judgement. Those in Christ will not face judgement at the 2nd death. The earth will be in ruins. Satan will be locked up for this period. After the 1000 years satan will be let out for a while ( God knows how long) then the 2nd coming. Satan and death thrown into the lake of fire, everyone believes in Christ, judgment on works, evil into the lake of fire, the Holy Jerusalem comes down to earth and the kingdom of God is now established on earth.

You are fairly accurate. The Tribulation lasts seven years; the clean up takes about a year and a half. There will be the 1,000 year reign of Christ, there will be children born during this time and they will have to believe in Jesus just like we do, they have 100 years to make their decision. Isaiah 65:19-20 And I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in my people: and the voice of weeping shall be no more heard in her, nor the voice of crying. There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed. Re 7:17; 21:4;
After the 1,000 are ended there will be the great white throne judgement, but only the unbelievers are judged there. Those whose names are written in the Book of Life will go into eternity with the Lord, all others will be cast into the Lake of Fire. Revelation 20: 7 - 15; Revelation 21:6-8; Da 12: 1, 2; Ps 69:28; Ps 28:4; 62:12; Pr 24:12,29; Ec 12:14; Jer 17:10; 32:19;

Does this help?

 

[Fidelis]

New Heart:

Posted by edwinG
You are fairly accurate. The Tribulation lasts seven years; the clean up takes about a year and a half. There will be the 1,000 year reign of Christ, there will be children born during this time and they will have to believe in Jesus just like we do, they have 100 years to make their decision. Isaiah 65:19-20 And I will rejoice in Jerusalem, and joy in my people: and the voice of weeping shall be no more heard in her, nor the voice of crying. There shall be no more thence an infant of days, nor an old man that hath not filled his days: for the child shall die an hundred years old; but the sinner being an hundred years old shall be accursed. Re 7:17; 21:4;
After the 1,000 are ended there will be the great white throne judgement, but only the unbelievers are judged there. Those whose names are written in the Book of Life will go into eternity with the Lord, all others will be cast into the Lake of Fire. Revelation 20: 7 - 15; Revelation 21:6-8; Da 12: 1, 2; Ps 69:28; Ps 28:4; 62:12; Pr 24:12,29; Ec 12:14; Jer 17:10; 32:19;

Does this help?

Only if you are looking for a good description of what NOT to believe.

 

[twf]

EdwinG: The Holy Spirit does guide us…but individuals are not infallible, and do not all hear the Spirit clearly. The Spirit does not speak only to individuals, but also to the Church as a whole. The Church of the New Testament certainly had rules. The Church of the New Testament had instructions and stipulations. The Church of the New Testament had leaders with authority who bound the Faithful to follow their instructions, for their own benefit. Does not Paul command the churches to do this or that on many occasions in his letters? Did he not, for example, in 1 Corinthians, lay down rules on the use of tongues? Did not Jesus grant the apostles (Mat 18), and especially Peter (Mat. 16) the power to ‘bind and to loose’ (which, in the context of the times, means the authority to teach, to impose disciplines, to excommunicate, etc). Did not the Apostles and Elders meet together in Jerusalem (Acts 15) and send out their judgement via letter to all the churches as binding upon them? Did not Paul instruct Timothy to teach and rebuke with authority? In 2 Timothy 2:1-2, why did Paul see the need for teachers to be appointed for each generation if all can hear the Spirit clearly?

Humans need governance. God knows that we will not all hear the Spirit clearly. God knows that we need leadership. Since the very beginning, the Church has been governed by authorities ordained of God. First by the apostles, and then by their successors of the Bishops. The writings of the Early Church Fathers demonstrate that the authority of the bishops was recognized immediately after the Apostolic Age. Bishops, with the authority to ‘bind and to loose’ are necessary to maintain unity and orthodoxy in the Church. Protestantism is splintered into many churches, because there is no clear authority that can bind the Faithful. If all people hear the Spirit clearly, then Protestants should be able to agree on the interpretation of Scripture, but God did not grant the gift of infallibility to each of us, but to His Church as a whole.

 

[RNRobert]

twf:

EdwinG: The Holy Spirit does guide us…but individuals are not infallible, and do not all hear the Spirit clearly. The Spirit does not speak only to individuals, but also to the Church as a whole. The Church of the New Testament certainly had rules. The Church of the New Testament had instructions and stipulations. The Church of the New Testament had leaders with authority who bound the Faithful to follow their instructions, for their own benefit. Does not Paul command the churches to do this or that on many occasions in his letters? Did he not, for example, in 1 Corinthians, lay down rules on the use of tongues? Did not Jesus grant the apostles (Mat 18), and especially Peter (Mat. 16) the power to ‘bind and to loose’ (which, in the context of the times, means the authority to teach, to impose disciplines, to excommunicate, etc). Did not the Apostles and Elders meet together in Jerusalem (Acts 15) and send out their judgement via letter to all the churches as binding upon them? Did not Paul instruct Timothy to teach and rebuke with authority? In 2 Timothy 2:1-2, why did Paul see the need for teachers to be appointed for each generation if all can hear the Spirit clearly?

Humans need governance. God knows that we will not all hear the Spirit clearly. God knows that we need leadership. Since the very beginning, the Church has been governed by authorities ordained of God. First by the apostles, and then by their successors of the Bishops. The writings of the Early Church Fathers demonstrate that the authority of the bishops was recognized immediately after the Apostolic Age. Bishops, with the authority to ‘bind and to loose’ are necessary to maintain unity and orthodoxy in the Church. Protestantism is splintered into many churches, because there is no clear authority that can bind the Faithful. If all people hear the Spirit clearly, then Protestants should be able to agree on the interpretation of Scripture, but God did not grant the gift of infallibility to each of us, but to His Church as a whole.

I couldn’t have said it better myself. It seems many non-Catholics seem to have a “denomination of one” mentality: Just “me and Jesus,” or “Me and the Holy Spirit,” “Me and the Bible,” etc., ad nauseum.
Humans are social creatures and we were made to work together (see Hebrews 12:29), and as a result we NEED rules. Without them, there is chaos.

 

[Fidelis]

michaelp:

I am just curious as to how Catholics handle the fact the the early Church, Papias, Irenaeus, etc. all believed in a coming 1000 year millennium. How come you do not see this as part of the deposit of Tradition?

Michael

Easy.

a) It wasn’t ALL of the early Church that believed this, although many of the ECFs did.

b) It has never been the constant teaching of the Church as contained explicitly in the Scriptures or defined formally by the Teaching Church, the Magisterium.

As has been often pointed out, appeal to the ECFs is never *proof * that the Church taught a certain doctrine, but is often very useful as an indication that at that an early date, a certain idea (for example, the Real Presence) that eventually WAS defined by the Church was believed by least some early Christians based on their understanding of Scripture and the Church did not just invent it out of whole cloth in the Middle Ages, as is sometimes charged.

The most you can say about the literal 1000 year hypothesis is that while the Church did not condemn it for a long time, she never taught it as defined doctrine.

 

[edwinG]

New Heart:

After the 1,000 are ended there will be the great white throne judgement, but only the unbelievers are judged there. Those whose names are written in the Book of Life will go into eternity with the Lord, all others will be cast into the Lake of Fire. Revelation 20: 7 - 15; Revelation 21:6-8; Da 12: 1, 2; Ps 69:28; Ps 28:4; 62:12; Pr 24:12,29; Ec 12:14; Jer 17:10; 32:19;

Does this help?

Hi New Heart,
Yes, I believe that after the “1000” year reign of Christ ( and the saints who died in witnessing during Tribulation) satan will be let out again for a short period. This reign of Christ’s is not on earth. During this short period I imagine satan tempts everyone. Then Christ will come, the rapture of all, good and evil, and placed in an evironment while new heavens and a new earth is made, then judgement of all good and evil, except for those who were in the first resurrrection. They will have no fear of the 2nd death. God will judge even between the fat and the lean sheep. We will be appointed positions of honour, some more honourable than others, depending on His will. We are members of His kingdom and will have responsibilities, so we must face judgement.
Remember hell is thrown into the lake of fire too .So it is not needed any more. So what is hell for. Unfortunately, hell is for nearly everyone, the wide road, and souls will stay there until the 2nd coming then judgment then either the kingdom of God down on earth or the lake of fire.
May Christ grow in your heart.
Pray His will be done through you
walk in love
edwinGhttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif

 

[edwinG]

twf:

EdwinG: The Holy Spirit does guide us…but individuals are not infallible, and do not all hear the Spirit clearly. The Spirit does not speak only to individuals,** the Chbut** also to urch as a whole. The Church of the New Testament certainly had rules. The Church of the New Testament had instructions and stipulations. The Church of the New Testament had leaders with authority who bound the Faithful to follow their instructions, for their own benefit. Does not Paul command the churches to do this or that on many occasions in his letters? Did he not, for example, in 1 Corinthians, lay down rules on the use of tongues? Did not Jesus grant the apostles (Mat 18), and especially Peter (Mat. 16) the power to ‘bind and to loose’ (which, in the context of the times, means the authority to teach, to impose disciplines, to excommunicate, etc). Did not the Apostles and Elders meet together in Jerusalem (Acts 15) and send out their judgement via letter to all the churches as binding upon them? Did not Paul instruct Timothy to teach and rebuke with authority? In 2 Timothy 2:1-2, why did Paul see the need for teachers to be appointed for each generation if all can hear the Spirit clearly?

Humans need governance. God knows that we will not all hear the Spirit clearly. God knows that we need leadership. Since the very beginning, the Church has been governed by authorities ordained of God. First by the apostles, and then by their successors of the Bishops. The writings of the Early Church Fathers demonstrate that the authority of the bishops was recognized immediately after the Apostolic Age. Bishops, with the authority to ‘bind and to loose’ are necessary to maintain unity and orthodoxy in the Church. Protestantism is splintered into many churches, because there is no clear authority that can bind the Faithful. If all people hear the Spirit clearly, then Protestants should be able to agree on the interpretation of Scripture, but God did not grant the gift of infallibility to each of us, but to His Church as a whole.

Hi twf,
May I ask, which rules do you have the desire to defend. If every rule; pick the one you want to defend first and let us look at it.
Obviously, I would defend to the limit of Christ’s strength in me, those commandments of His. It is not Christ’s commandments that are enslaving you. Talk to me about the others, let us look at a scapular if you like. Your broad brush paints confusion for me and camouflage for you. Please help me by putting the spot light on a single issue so we can distinguish between agreement and disagreement. Also, to aid understanding could you write the church when you mean Christ’s body, and the Roman Catholic church when you mean the Roman Catholic church. It would appear your forefathers who named it “the Roman Catholic church” sort to distinguish it from “The Church” as this is how they saw it.

My post had about 11 questions. No attempt was made to answer any of them. We can’t move forward if we dont discuss the issues. If you cant decide on a rule, can we discuss the green scapular. I often see a link to this site at the bottom of some post. We could use this as a basis of discussion.
I am also intrigued by the phrasing of “the Holy Spirit speaks to the church as a whole” I imagine you mean the Roman Catholic church, as He is the Church.
May Christ grow in you
walk in love
edwinGhttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif

 

[michaelp]

Fidelis:

Easy.

a) It wasn’t ALL of the early Church that believed this, although many of the ECFs did.

b) It has never been the constant teaching of the Church as contained explicitly in the Scriptures or defined formally by the Teaching Church, the Magisterium.

As has been often pointed out, appeal to the ECFs is never *proof *that the Church taught a certain doctrine, but is often very useful as an indication that at that an early date, a certain idea (for example, the Real Presence) that eventually WAS defined by the Church was believed by least some early Christians based on their understanding of Scripture and the Church did not just invent it out of whole cloth in the Middle Ages, as is sometimes charged.

The most you can say about the literal 1000 year hypothesis is that while the Church did not condemn it for a long time, she never taught it as defined doctrine.

Were any of those who believed in the 1000 year millennium part of the apostolic succession who inherited the deposit of faith?

 

[edwinG]

I couldn’t have said it better myself. It seems many non-Catholics seem to have a “denomination of one” mentality: Just “me and Jesus,” or “Me and the Holy Spirit,” “Me and the Bible,” etc., ad nauseum.
Humans are social creatures and we were made to work together (see Hebrews 12:29), and as a result we NEED rules. Without them, there is chaos.

Hi RNRobert,
For your answer see also the answer to twf. You seem to lack an understanding of my position. Never have I denied the position of denominational churches. I am a member of one myself. The church is a blessing for me. .
The bold type is a copy from your post.
It seems many non-Catholics seem to have a “denomination of one” mentality: Just “me and Jesus,” or “Me and the Holy Spirit,” “Me and the Bible,” etc., ad nauseum. Tell me then Robert, does “Robert and Mary” make you nauseous as well.
Your rules Robert. James 2:12 So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the Law of Liberty
Galatians 5;4 “You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law,you have fallen from grace.”
Are you dry RNRobert. If you are not following the lead of the Holy Spirit the only thing left to you is someones law of the flesh. The Law of Liberty is following the lead of the Holy Spirit, which establishes the Law. The law which pertains to you may differ in parts from the law which pertains to me, differ in the time in which it is enforced in our lives, as we all have different work to do and our own separate path. This is a narrow path because only you are on it. But the laws of the flesh are followed by the massess, the wide pathway, security in numbers maybe but only for a short time.
Dont be scared of loosing your way Robert. He wont let you be lost. Try, submit to Him and only Him, Jesus Christ, and trust, believe in His ability to save you, every minute of every day, continously, and grow in love and Holy fear and reverence.
May Christ mature in your heart
walk in love
edwinGhttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif

 

[Fidelis]

michaelp:

Were any of those who believed in the 1000 year millennium part of the apostolic succession who inherited the deposit of faith?

By this are you asking if any of these ECF were bishops? Many were. But remember, not everything that a bishop says is infallible teaching. Only the when the bishops speak as a whole, with the endorsement of the pope, can they teach infallibly. That doesn’t mean they were necessarily speaking heresy when they spoke about a literal 1000 years, they were just enunciating one possible, though not defined, interpretation.

 

[RNRobert]

edwinG:

Hi RNRobert,
For your answer see also the answer to twf. You seem to lack an understanding of my position. Never have I denied the position of denominational churches. I am a member of one myself. The church is a blessing for me. .
The bold type is a copy from your post.
It seems many non-Catholics seem to have a “denomination of one” mentality: Just “me and Jesus,” or “Me and the Holy Spirit,” “Me and the Bible,” etc., ad nauseum. Tell me then Robert, does “Robert and Mary” make you nauseous as well.
Your rules Robert. James 2:12 So speak and so do as those who will be judged by the Law of Liberty
Galatians 5;4 “You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law,you have fallen from grace.”
Are you dry RNRobert. If you are not following the lead of the Holy Spirit the only thing left to you is someones law of the flesh. The Law of Liberty is following the lead of the Holy Spirit, which establishes the Law. The law which pertains to you may differ in parts from the law which pertains to me, differ in the time in which it is enforced in our lives, as we all have different work to do and our own separate path. This is a narrow path because only you are on it. But the laws of the flesh are followed by the massess, the wide pathway, security in numbers maybe but only for a short time.
Dont be scared of loosing your way Robert. He wont let you be lost. Try, submit to Him and only Him, Jesus Christ, and trust, believe in His ability to save you, every minute of every day, continously, and grow in love and Holy fear and reverence.
May Christ mature in your heart
walk in love
edwinGhttp://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif

Edwin, Edwin, Edwin. You must have a very low regard for the Catholic Church. According to you, no one can follow the Holy Spirit and be a Catholic at the same time. If you would look at the history of the saints of the church you will find that they had a holiness unsurpassed by non-Catholics (with the exception of the Orthodox. Why this animosity toward the Catholic Church?
BTW Edwin I asked you a question on another thread that you never answered: Whatever happened to apostolic authority? You accept that the Apostles had authority to make binding decisions on Christians: What happened to that authority when they died? Did they choose successors, or what? I submit to the leaders of the Catholic Church not because I’m “dry” or because I “lack the spirit” but because I believe these men are the successors of the apostles appointed by CHRIST HIMSELF. It is your way that is not Biblical, Edwin.

 

[Calbreese]

Because Catholic Exegetes say it is wrong. They wrote the footnotes of the New American Standard, based on logic and sound rules of investigation, with help from the Holy Spirit. 1,000 years means forever. by the way, the Anti-Christ (ccc:675) is outed at www.istheBeast.com sound fundamental Exegesic Interpretation. Look for Papal Announcement by World Communications Day 9/30/2005. IHS Daryl