Predictably, there is nothing in this “response” about an alleged letter from the USCCB. This also speaks volumes.
Hi Spauline:I think he’s got some good ideas, and I think that on purely one level of meaning, he is OK and good.
I will, however, very much disagree that amillennialism provides the deepest understanding of the Millennium. In my analysis, the Millennium is figurative (as it must be), but practically future, as it is, IMHO, rather the age of peace that will follow the most likely minor chastisement. See my thread in these forums:
Deficiencies with amillennial suppositions
Secondly, I perceive an even deeper and more penetrating analysis of the False Prophet that uses the notion of the devil’s plagiarizing of the Sacraments:
The Lamb, the True Logos, and the Second Beast, the False Logos
His analysis of the Seal of God is too vague. I don’t see it merely as Baptism, for heretics and schismatics have baptism, but they are not fully protected from spiritual harm in their “forehead”, as they can be led PARTIALLY astray in their intellect, seeing as they have not the fullness of truth only to be found in the Catholic Church. Toward that end, I think he’s missing some deeper analysis of the trumpets and ecclesiology:
The Seal, the Mark, and Everything In Between
Finally, he doesn’t seem to fully probe the depths of the beast as a image of successive ages of sin across all human history, precisely tied to the “evening” or “darkness” of the days of creation, which some ECFs see as imaging seven (eight) successive stages in the Redemption of the World:
The Beast and Historicism
I know this is alot, but really check them out. I promise you won’t be disappointed!
scott
Hi, Mark
That is what I understood- protestantism is weakened in that it has only 2 sacraments, i.e., it repersents the minimum state of being Christian. The second beast will create a false religion with 2 sacramanets in the future mimicking protestantism. In fact, I would add, it may already exist amongst the protestant churches.
well, no, that is the essence of the spiritual nature of the false prophet, the same false prophecy of any of the ages of the beast. It was metaphor. Toward that end, the false prophet already exists in the modern apostasy, as it did in Rome, Antiochus, Egypt, Babel, etc. So, I’m not sure that you understand me fully.
Punt.
Pope.
Magesterium.
Holy Spirit.
Play Jeopardy music ten seconds........
Who you gonna call?
Igneasius Press?Any of the above…as long as it’s NOT Bob Sugenis. Bob’s not exactly long on good answers.
It is true that the Church has not definitively ruled out all but one interpretation, but it is also clear that it has traditionally held the amillenial view at least since the time of Augustine. The Chiliast view was rejected. I believe that this is the only view the Church has definitively rejected.
If you are referring to this statement: “You are nitpicking, Jacob. You are full of hate and jelaousy, and it shows.” It was not related to the question of imprimatur.
The Scriptures portion does, but the commentary does not at this time. Sungenis’ book is based on the traditional Chruch view, and is much more detailed than moest study Bibles (560 pages for the Apocalypse).
Robert Sungeis is in the process of obtaining an imprimatur. The current volume does not have one.
Answered here.Mark Wyatt,
I asked you questions about this a month ago and you sounded like there were no problems with getting the imprimatur from Dr. Sungenis’ bishop for the Apocolypse study bible.
Is it true that his bishop turned him down for the imprimtur? And did you know about it when you answered back then?