The coming of Enoch and Elijah in revelations

  • Thread starter Thread starter JFonseka
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JFonseka

Guest
Does Catholic doctrine affirm that Enoch and Elijah are the two witnesses mentioned in revelations?

I know no one knows except the Father as to when the hour is that these things will start to pass but around when is all this stuff meant to happen? But I guess that’s a stupid question because if this was known we would all be prepared.

And I bet there will be people pretending to be Enoch and Elijah?

This is not a joke, do you reckon if we are still around at the time we can meet them? I really want to meet them. After all Enoch hasn’t walked the Earth in some 3000 years or so.
 
Read Hank Hannegraaf’s book “The Apocalypse Code.” He does the best job of anyone I’ve come across in defending the 2000-year-old belief that almost everything in Revelation refers to the first century.
 
From the Haydock Commentary:
Ver. 3. My two witnesses…shall prophesy twelve hundred and sixty days. It is a very common interpretation, that by these two witnesses must be understood Henoch [Enoch] and Elias [Elijah], who are to come before the end of the world. It is true this is what we read in several of the ancient Fathers, insomuch, that Dr. Wells, in his paraphrase, calls it the “consent of the primitive fathers,” and in his notes says, it is of “unexceptionable authority.” This opinion (at least as to Elias) is grounded on those words of the prophet Malachy [Malachias/Malachi], (Chap. iv. 5.) behold, I will send you Elias, the prophet, before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the Lord; and also on the words of our Saviour, Christ, (Matthew xvii. 11.) where he tells his disciples: Elias indeed shall come, and restore all things. But I cannot say that the consent of the fathers is so unanimous as to Henoch: for we find by St. Hilary, that some thought Jeremy [Jeremias/Jeremiah] was to come with Elias, and he himself thought that with Elias would come Moses. See his commentary on Matt. p. 710, Nov. edit. Secondly, allowing it a received opinion that Henoch and Elias are again to come before the day of judgment, yet it is not the constant doctrine of the ancient fathers, that by these two witnesses in this place of the Apocalypse, must be understood Henoch and Elias. St. Cyprian expounds it of two sorts of martyrs for the Catholic faith; to wit, they who suffer death, and others who only suffered imprisonment, loss of goods, and the like. Others expound it of the testimonies concerning Christ and his Church, of which some are in the Old Testament, some in the New. To these we must join all those interpreters who expound all the visions and predictions in the Apocalypse, till the 20th chapter, of the persecutions raised by the Jews: or by the heathens against the Church, which have already happened. Of these, both as to ancient fathers and later interpreters, see Alcazar in his Prologomena, note 6, p. 33, and note 12, p. 48. (Witham) — Two witnesses. It is commonly understood of Henoch and Elias. (Challoner)
Click to expand...
 
scottm said:
Read Hank Hannegraaf’s book “The Apocalypse Code.” He does the best job of anyone I’ve come across in defending the 2000-year-old belief that almost everything in Revelation refers to the first century.
Click to expand...
Why then was it preserved? What is in it for us?
 
What, does this mean enoch and elijah aren’t coming?
Click to expand...
Your Catholic forefathers didn’t think so. If you think you’re better at exegesis than they are, hey, more power to you. I don’t think I am better. I am not looking for two men to literally appear and spew forth fire and die in the streets with TV cameras watching their corpses for three days. I’m not looking for that.

Besides, I prefer the theory that it’s Moses and Elija. 😉
Joe_Kelley said:
Why then was it preserved? What is in it for us?
Click to expand...
Ya, good question!

“Hope.” Those guys suffered terribly. The more I read about Nero, the more shocked I am at how low a person can go. The Christians under his rules suffered terribly, yet they got through it, and God is still on the throne. God’s church didn’t die in spite of the fact that Nero killed Peter and Paul and countless other preachers. The message of Revelation is that in the end God will win, period. God wins. And in the end we Christians will win, and in the end we Christians will be vindicated. All of that is wrapped up in the one word “hope.”
 
Joe_Kelley said:
Why then was it preserved? What is in it for us?
Click to expand...
Before a generation had time to pass from the scene, the world was supposed to pass away and make room for the Kingdom of God. It did, 40 years after Jesus made His prediction. Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed in 70 A.D. It just wasn’t the end that so many Fundamentalist project onto the biblical writers.

Just as the Roman world, the Byzantine world, the North African world, the Native American World, the Soviet Union world, and so on. Until the absolute End, it will end many times over, on the installment plan. So, Revelation is timely for every age. It keeps the Bible’s authority from growing weak.

The destruction that God brought down on the Temple was a fulfillment of prophecy, but it was also itself a prophecy, of the cosmic Temple’s destruction at the end of history. And the judgement of Jerusalem is an object lesson for all other worlds until then.
 
scottm said:
Besides, I prefer the theory that it’s Moses and Elija. 😉
Click to expand...
Moses died, Enoch and Elijah didn’t, it makes more sense that Enoch would be returning, well whatever the forefathers say…they know best. And I’m not being sarcastic
 
JFonseka said:
Moses died, Enoch and Elijah didn’t, it makes more sense that Enoch would be returning
Click to expand...
Well, playing along with the theory that there will be two human witnesses, that is a good argument. The counter argument is that Moses and Elijah are the two who appeared on the Mount of Transfiguration, and Satan argued vehemently for the body of Moses, and Moses and Elijah together represent the entire teachings of God in the OT – one is the Law, and the other is the Prophets. It would be fitting to the have the “Law and the Prophets” preaching to the world during the Tribulation, and, as the theory goes, that what’s they were talking with Jesus about on the Mountain. And, as the theory goes, Satan wanted the body of Moses so as to prevent God raising Moses from the dead for this very purpose – as if that would work, but still.
 
With all due respect, there is no Gospel of “Hank”. God’s Word as the Book of Revelation is quite clear when we look at Truth. John was shown Visions, actual scenes of the future, by an Angel sent from God (yes through Jesus Christ). Those two witnesses were there, so believe it! **
** Rome was a single case of God’s Word repeating SYMBOLICLY throughout His Creation, an Emotionally based, finger pointing cover story from God through John. Another example, seven hills of Rome, current day is seven continents.
** However, the last, in time, interpretation must be literal, literal because it was a Vision, an actual scene of the future. **
** On Judgment Day, the Lord will come back, leading an army of Angels – all on horseback. All will be judged by His Word. Eternal Spiritual Temple built on earth.**
** Jews will see their first coming, Christians their second Coming, and on…that is why the Book says a name known to no one but Himself – so it can apply appropriate nomenclature to everyone.**
** Trust in God’s Truth…**
** God Bless Us All!**
 
At La Salette, Our Lady said: 31. ‘The Church will be eclipsed, the world will be in consternation. But behold Enoch and Elie filled with the Spirit of God; they will preach with the strength of God, and men of good will will believe in God, and many souls will be consoled; they will make great progress by the virtue of the Holy Spirit and will condemn the devilish errors of the antichrist.’

Also, St. Thomas Aquinas believed that the two prophets of Revelation will be Enoch and Elijah, and that those two are in Paradise awaiting the day.

[Sirach]
{44:16} Enoch pleased God, and he was transferred to paradise, so that he might offer repentance to the nations.

In my view, the book of Revelation refers to the future, to the tribulation, which is divided into two parts: one part for this generation and one part for the distant future. I also believe that the dates of future events can be known from Scripture.

my online articles about the future: catholicplanet.com/future/index.htm

The praeterist view is that the tribulation has already occurred, in the first century A.D. However, there are numerous Saints who lived after the first century A.D. and who believed the tribulation to be still in the future, including St. Victorinius, St. Irenaeus, St. Thomas, etc.

The Catechism states that the tribulation and the Antichrist are in the future.
 
How will we know who the real Enoch and Elijah is, no doubt that in the future there will be a lot of pretend Enoch’s and Elijah’s. Since we don’t know what Enoch and Elijah look like…
 
Ron_Conte said:
The praeterist view is that the tribulation has already occurred, in the first century A.D. However, there are numerous Saints who lived after the first century A.D. and who believed the tribulation to be still in the future, including St. Victorinius, St. Irenaeus, St. Thomas, etc.

The Catechism states that the tribulation and the Antichrist are in the future.
Click to expand...
All of what you say here is true. The event of 70 A.D. has fulfilled the prophecies in Revelation bringing us into the millenium, while at the same time being a prophecy of a still-future, final fulfillment.

Compair this to the prophecy in (Isaiah 7:14) “Behold, a young worman (virgin) shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.” Did you know the prophecy was fulfilled in the eyes of God’s people, with the birth of Mahershalalhashbaz in (Isaiah 8:3-4) At the same time the leaders of the people of God taught that this prophecy had another future fulfillment, and we all know it came to pass with the birth of Christ.

So, we have a both/and situation with Revelation, not an either/or one. The two witnesses surrounding 70 A.D. symbolize the Law and the Prophets, Moses and Elijah. As long as the Temple stood, the Mosaic system gave voice to the Law and the Prophet. They witnessed against the paganism of both the Romans and the unfaithful Jews.

The Law and Prophets were destroyed by the Roman army in 70 A.D. They weren’t silenced though, they came back to life. Even now they proclaim their message of moral uprightness and godly worship in the Heavenly city of the New Jerusalem, which is the Church.

Here is the most noteworthy aspect to keep in mind. Apocolyptic liturature has alot of symbolizm in it. St. John specifically points out the allegorical nature of this vision in (Rev 11:8) This is the only place he reminds that he is writing allegorically. We shouldn’t look for literal witnesses here, because this section has the least literal fulfillment.
 
I don’t agree. I take Revelation to refer to future events, for this generation and for the distant future, and not to the first century A.D.
 
Ron_Conte said:
I don’t agree. I take Revelation to refer to future events, for this generation and for the distant future, and not to the first century A.D.
Click to expand...
With all due respect, why can’t it refer to the first century and the future? You think it refers to this generation and the distant future. 😉

Victorinus in 270 AD wrote the Commentary on The Apocalypse. This is the earliest extant explanation of The Apocalypse and it speaks of the Millennium clearly: “Those years wherin Satan is bound are in the first advent of Christ, even to the end of the age; and they are called a thousand. . .”

Eusebius who is known as the father of Church history said “he (Papias) says there would be a certain millennium after the resurrection, and that there would be a corporeal reign of Christ on ths very earth; which things he appears to have imagined, as if they were authorized by the apostolic narrations, no understanding correctly those matters which they propounded mystically in their representations. For he was very limited in his comprehension, as is evident from his discourses . . .”

St. Jerome, who taught that “the Holy City denotes the present world” or Justin Martyr who said “And He shall judge among the nations . . . and they shall beat their swords into ploughshares, . . and it did so come to pass, we can convice you.”

As I stated earlier, The events of 70 AD can be a prophecy of a still future, final fulfillment. There is no need to deny the early chuch fathers because they would probably agree with the CCC’s statement of a future tribulation. None of them, myself included, would deny that final battle is yet to come.

Ryan 🙂
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top