The false prophet?

[doulos33]

In Unveiling the Apocalypse, Emmett O’Regan argues that the false prophet, who prepares the way for the Antichrist, is to be identified with the little horn of the Book of Daniel, and is modelled after Antiochus IV Epiphanes - a persecutor of Jews. The Book of Daniel states that after the little horn is destroyed the “kingdom and the dominion and the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High.”
O’Regan believes that this is a reference to the restoration of Israel, making the false prophet Adolf Hitler, another persecutor of Jews. Hitler’s persecution of the Jews thus foreshadows the Antichrist’s future persecution of Christians in the same way Antiochus Epiphanes foreshadowed Nero - the first persecutor of Christians and original “beast” of the Book of Revelation. The ten horns of Daniel’s fourth beast are thus the ten nations of the Axis powers during the Second World War.
He uses this to explain the 1878 version of the prophecy of La Salette:

‘A forerunner of the antichrist with his troops from several nations will fight against the true Christ, the only Savior of the world; he will spill much blood, and will want to annihilate the worship of God in order to make himself be looked upon as a God.

Melanie’s original 1846 prediction can only be explained if this “antichrist” who is not the Antichrist refers to Hitler: “Lastly hell will reign on earth. It will be then that Antichrist will be born of a sister, but woe to her! Many will believe in him, because he will claim to have come from heaven, woe to those who will believe in him! That time is not far away, twice 50 years will not go by.” Melanie said that twice fifty years would not go by until this was fulfilled, which leads up to the year 1946 - and Hitler died in 1945. So twice fifty years did not go by - the prophecy was fulfilled exactly 99 years later.

 

[cephas161619]

That’s not what i said.

As the antichrist will seem like the Christ, so the false prophet will seem like Elijah.

“The Prophet” refers to Moses (See Jesus of Nazareth by HH BXVI).

 

[spauline]

Here is a personal take of mine on one level, an idealistic level:

False Prophet Part I

Loaves & Fishes: Revelation of Sacramental Ecclesiology?

In Catholicism, there are those big-time verses that the Church has dogmatically defined as dealing with central questions of doctrine.

Some examples are:

Matthew 16:18 – Peter as rock of the Church – The Infallible Papacy.
John 20 – “Whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven them…” – Confession
The Last Supper – “This is my Body, this is My Blood” – the Eucharist
Romans – “Through one man came sin and death” – Original Sin

I have always pondered that, nevertheless, there is no cut and dry passage or passages in Scripture that sum up the Seven Sacraments all at once, like these above verses spell out their respective doctrines. For, clearly, although the Seven Sacraments are of supreme significance in the Catholic Faith, being monstrous pillars of faith–without which Catholicism would not be Catholicism, having such paramount essentiality to the faith that an entire FOURTH of the Catholic Catechism (along with the Creed, Moral Life and Prayer) is devoted to them–nevertheless, there is no single part of Scripture that, in a clean cut way, implies there are seven and only seven sacraments. Rather, each of the seven sacraments are only fished out in various places. No central place seems to shout “there are SEVEN and ONLY SEVEN Sacraments”!

But shouldn’t it be appropriate that with such monumental significance, God the Father would have left us with a mysterious Revelation of the Sacraments in Scripture? Well, I believe He has! In fact, I believe that it is in one of the most obvious places, and, were that not enough, that such passages also reveal another essential component of the Sacraments, how they are related to Ecclesiology, that is, the nature of division in the Body of Christ.

And what are these passages? How about none other than the Loaves and Fishes stories, one of which we just read this past feast of Corpus Christi, the Eucharist!

Toward that end, let us work it out.

Firstly, although Catholicism already sees the Eucharist in these passages–since, as Christ fed the multitudes literally, so also does He feed us grace, His very self in the Holy Eucharist–should we not also consider that any time Christ gives us sanctifying grace in general, He is feeding us spiritually? For what is sanctifying grace except a spiritual “feeding” of God to us with His very life and love from the Trinity? Moreover, is it not a reality in our Catholic Faith that the Sacraments are the supreme source of sanctifying grace? Therefore, what better metaphor for the Sacraments than physical food (loaves and fishes)?

So now, let us move on to deeper considerations. If the Seven Sacraments can be seen in the loaves and the fishes, how will one interpret the way they are partitioned or numbered, as in 7 loaves and a few fish, or 5 loaves and 2 fish. Well, certainly, there are ways to partition the Sacraments according to types, as in the Sacraments of Initiation (Baptism and Confirmation), the Sacraments of healing (Confession, Anointing), or the Sacraments of Vocation (Marriage and Holy Orders). However, these do not immediately match the division. My suggestion is rather to see, as hinted at above, the partitioning of the Sacraments to be correlated to a much more important reality, the way that the Sacramental life is affected by Christian division.

That is, of all ways to understand the Sacramental life, the union of Christians is a central issue and mystery of the efficacy of the Gospel. More specifically, Christ prayed, as does the Church in every Eucharist prayer, for the unity of the faithful, in order that the world may believe on the Son. For, to the degree that Christians are united, the world can have faith, and to the degree they are not, the world shall have trouble believing.

 

[spauline]

…

Considering this paramount issue, we remember, again, that rifts in the Body of Christ affect the sacramental nature that the separated Churches and communities retain.

As we probe the implications, we shall see that this theology will perfectly explain the presumed partitioning of the Loaves and Fishes. Toward that end, let us first review how Catholicism understands the rifts in Christ’s Body. Well, from Catholic doctrine, we already know that there are really only two forms of rift in the Body of Christ:

**Schism **
Heresy

Now, to understand these forms of rift, we must recall that they are related to sources of truth in Christianity that the separated parties dispute in their respective conditions, namely:

Apostolic Succession in general (Bishops and Oral Tradition)
The Special Apostolic Successor, Peter (the Pope)

The two forms of separation from Christ are then related to the two sources above in that the separating party either rejects only the Special Successor [Peter] (only the one source) , or all of the Successors (both sources).

This first form of rift is Schism, to retain general Apostolic Succession but to lack Peter. This is mainly the Orthodox.

The other form, the much worse one, is Heresy, to reject all Apostolic Succession. This is mainly the Protestants.

So now, in view of the forms of rift, we again state that the sources of truth above are certainly intimately connected to the sacramental life. This would make sense if only because, whereas the Sacraments feed our wills with grace, so our intellects are fed by truth. Hence, we could obviously expect that when one’s truth is diminished, so could grace, at least to some degree. *Therefore, it is surely no coincidence that the degree of sacramental grace available to Christians is intimately connected to the degree of truth that they have. *

Now, to return to miraculous feedings, we have seen that there were only two occasions in Christ’s ministry that He miraculously fed large crowds with the multiplication of loaves and fishes. This is the same number as the forms of rift in the Christ’s disciples. Specifically, we saw that on the one occasion (recounted four times in the Gospels), Christ fed 5,000 persons with 5 loaves and 2 fish, and that on the other occasion (recounted two times in the Gospels), Christ fed 4,000 persons with 7 loaves and a “few” fish.

Now, again, the sacraments feed us sanctifying grace, hence, the loaves and fishes can prefigure the sacraments, especially since there are seven, like the explicit numbers or their conglomerate in the loaves and fishes (7, or 5 and 2).

…

 

[spauline]

…

In addition, we can observe that loaves are made from barely, which is grown in the earth, a place of relative stability, whereas fish come from the sea, a place of chaos or lack of stability.

Consequently, since the sea and earth are contrasted in the degree of stability, feeding on loaves could symbolize stability of doctrine and feeding on fish could symbolize instability of doctrine. For example, Peter and Jesus are the rock of truth (Matt. 16:18), the Church is the pillar and “ground” of the truth (1Tim 3:15), but heretics are tossed “to and fro by every wave of doctrine” (Ephesians 4:14 and James 1:6).

Now, what is the source of stability of truth in Christendom? It is none other than, first, Apostolic Succession in general and then, in supreme form, Peter. Why? Because *from *that formal authoritative Succession comes the Sacred *Oral *Tradition, or the Oral Word of God, which provides the stability for the proper interpretation of the Written Word, Scripture, a more sure foundation to discern the true doctrines of the Apostles. Without them, there is only the “waves of chaos” in attempting to ascertain Scripture apart from Tradition, the lot of Protestants, who are all over the map doctrinally.

Therefore, the earth is a good metaphor for general Apostolic Succession, Peter is already the Rock in Matthew 16:18, and the sea is a good metaphor for sola Scriptura, the doctrine of Scripture alone without Tradition.

Is it any wonder, then, that Heretics, who lack the very stability of doctrine, the “earth” of Apostolic Succession, lose the **5 sacraments **that require the “earth”, that is, 5 loaves–Confession, Eucharist, Confirmation, Holy Orders and Anointing of the Sick–and retain only 2 sacraments, Baptism and Marriage–2 fish, seeing as they can only “fish” in their instability of doctrine.

Then, similarly, the Schismatics (Orthodox), who do have Apostolic Succession in general, or the “earth”, have all 7** sacraments** (7 loaves), but they are a little unstable in doctrine because they lack Peter, the ultimate foundation of truth (they have a “few fish”).

And now, consider a deeper implication in looking at the number in the respective crowds, the 5,000 and the 4,000. In actual history, the Apostles only left 5 Apostolic Sees, first, Peter, the Supreme See in Rome, or the West, and 4 more, those that are now in schism, the Sees of the Orthodox Churches, or the East.

Note also that since Peter himself has the special charism of infallibility, being the head of the One Completely True Church, *the fullness of Apostolicity resides in him, even apart from the other four Sees. *Hence, we can say that in a certain sense 5 is a good symbol of Peter, so that the multitudes of his children in the West are 5,000. Similarly, the other 4 Sees, as it were, of the Orthodox, symbolize almost full apostolicity, but not quite, just short of the fullness. Therefore, 4,000 is a good symbol of the East, the Schismatic Orthodox.

In other words, these two sides of Christianity, the “4,000” and the “5,000”, are divided according to two Poles, or Kingdoms, the East and the West. That is, in the West, Peter, the fullness of Apostolicity (5,000, the fullness of all 5 Apostolic Sees), reigns, whereas in the East, the 4 Apostolic Sees reign (the 4,000).

Consequently, the two feeding instances can be seen as the two primary Kingdoms in Christendom, the East and the West. The imagery fits the history perfectly, since, in the East, the kingdom of 4,000, the primary division of Christians has been Schism–Catholics divided against Orthodox, 7 loaves and a few fish–whereas in the West, the primary division has been Heresy–Catholics divided against Protestants, 5 loaves and 2 fish.

As an addendum, note also that just as our New Testament Kingdom is split between East and West–the East being the one in Schism and taking most of the Apostolic Kings, four out of five, and yet the West retaining the true ultimate kingship in Peter–so the Kingdom of OT was split between North and South, the North being in Schism and taking 10 of the 12 tribes of Israel, which are types of the 12 apostles, and yet the true kingship of the Jews remaining in the Remnant South, Judah. This is interesting if only because the Christ has said, “it shall all be fulfilled!”

To conclude, whereas it is not entirely certain that God intended this allegory to be present here, one has to admit that the coincidences are astounding. Hence, perhaps some day, the Church will use these passages to provide dogmatic basis to the Seven Sacraments and how they relate to the Ecclesiology!

 

[spauline]

**The false prophet Part II
**
Baptism and Marriage – BASIC Sacraments of Protestants Summarize all BASIC Goodness in Life!

Might I add extrapolation on the purposes of Life:

1. To know, love, and serve God in this life
2. To be happy with Him forever in the next

The first condition, to know, love and serve God, is the Baptismal disposition, since knowing God is faith, and love and service is good will, or repentance, the two primary dispositions that we must have for Baptism and to remain faithful to our Baptismal vows.

And the second condition is like MARRIAGE to God, since collectively, we shall all be caught up as the Woman who marries Jesus.

And it is interesting to note that Baptism and Marriage are the two sacraments that are truly BASIC, since they are the only ones had by those Christians most fully separated from us, that is, separated from Apostolic Succession, or Protestantism.

Moreover, see how these two basic sacraments relieve the two conditions of Original Sin: Baptism relieves us of the burden of Original Sin, and Marriage relieves us the secondary burden of Original Sin, concupiscence.

This is very profound, considering that, Original Sin and its residue are the basis of the Fall, and clearly the fall is the antithesis of our life purposes above, and therefore also of the basic sacraments:

Baptism and Marriage:

Anti-Baptismal-Spirit: The first lie of the dragon is, have no regard for Baptismal disposition, no faith, no repentance: believe what you want and do what you want.

Anti-Marital-Spirit: The second lie is like it: don’t live for the marraige with God in the next life but live for superficial “intercourse”, or fornication, spiritually, with THIS world, that is, spiritually fornicate withe CreaTION rathre than MARRY the CreaTOR.

…

 

[spauline]

…

Further, Solomon said all wickedness came before Abraham was. So then, all lies of the fall came before Abraham was. And that corroborates our theology above:

The two greatest stages of sin before Abraham were the Wickedness of Noah’s day and the Tower of Babel.

Noah’s day was Anti-Baptism: The world was wicked (no repentance) and had no faith (they mocked Noah’s revelation of flood). So then God BAPTIZED the world, the FLOOD.

The Tower of Babel was anti-Marriage toward God: man was gathered together as ONE WOMAN, but not a SPOUSE to God, the People of God, rather a WHORE, joining herself in selfish materialistic glory with the WORLD, a tower, rather than seeking God’s glory and HIM as the spouse.

So God divided them up through language confounding and MARRIED one nation, the Hebrews, His First Bride.

How appropriate then, the two great first falls of man are against the basic principles of life, against the basic sacraments of all, and they were healed spiritually by the basic sacraments’ signs.

And how appropriate, Jesus, the Lamb, in apocalypse, has seven horns, and the false prophet has two, like a Lamb.

Now, Tertullian, per JPII and his Theology of the Body, taught that the devil mocks or plagiarizes the sacraments, twisting their signs evilly. He mocks the Eucharist with gluttony and drunkenness. He mocked Baptism through Pilate, who instead of cleaning his head of bad faith and ill will, washed his hands of moral culpubality of the ultimate sin of all, murdering the Son of God. He mocks Marriage with literal Prostitution.

Now, couldn’t the seven horns of the Lamb be seen, at least in one layer of meaning, as the sacraments, seeing as horns many times symbolize power in the Bible, and Jesus’ greatest power is in His GRACE, of which the SEVEN Sacraments are the greatest source? And if so, seeing as it says in apocalypse 13 that the false prophet has TWO horns, “like a Lamb”, which two might this spiritual false prophet mock in his two horns?

Use common sense: the basic sacraments, which are the basis of all goodness, and the only two sacraments left to the most separated of Christians. So that the mocking of the two basis of all goodness above, is the basis of all EVIL, the lies of the fall: what little base goodness retained by hereTICS is mocked into the ultimate hereSY !

Whew!

 

[spauline]

The False Prophet Part III

The Lies of the Fall and the Second Beast

The beast and the false prophet do not need to be literal and at the end of the world to apply to a particular age of history…

For, if the dragon is the father of lies, like the Eternal Father is the Father of the Truth, why not see the beast as the Incarnation of his lies, his children who don’t listen to God and do as they please, and who live for the creation ra…ther than the Creator? For just as the Father begets children through grace, should not the wicked father have his own children in the world, who are also of it?

But also, if the love and truth spoken and shared between the Eternal Father and Son IS the Holy Spirit, what should the False Prophet be except the lies spoken between the wicked father and his sons, the lies of the Fall.

But really are the lies of the Fall? Do they change from age to age. Of course not, for Solomon testified that anything that has ever been wicked came before Abraham was.

And what happened before Abraham was? Well it is simple: there were two great darknesses.

The first was the wickedness of Noah’s day. And God healed it with a Baptism, which seems to imply that, seeing as God heals with appropriate symbolism, what He was healing was surely against the PRINCIPLES of Baptism. And what are the base principles of Baptism, or rather, the implicit desire for Baptism except faith and repentance as best as one sees them, seeing as these are the base dispositions necessary for an adult to receive this sacrament formally.

And this was, in fact, the condition of Noah’s day: for the outer world, most of which was wicked, had neither faith nor repentance, not faith, for it mocked the claim that God was about to chastise their wickedness with a cleansing Flood, and not repentance, for they continued in their wickedness and did not turn back to God.

The second great age of darkness was then clearly the Tower of Babel, which symbolizes humanity’s perverse unity that seeks to fornicate with the Creation rather than marry the Creator. For, at Babel, the world does not want to be a spouse of God but to join itself whorishly with the material world, so that it might find its ultimate fulfillment not the Eternal Marriage to come, alone of which can satisfy the longing of any human heart, but in the things of this world, in materialistic glory.

And in a certain sense, this is really like an “anti-Marital” position toward God, seeing as the world, as in the image of the decadent Whore of Babylon in Apocalypse, is being spiritually unfaithful of the call to be joined forever to God as His Beloved Spouse in the NEXT world in exchange for a mere superficial and mocking union with the THIS world and its created goods.

And really, just as God healed the “anti-Baptism” of Noah’s day with a Baptism, so God healed the “anti-Marriage” of humanity at Babel with “Marriage”! How? Well, after delaying the ultimate fruits of a world united in union for brute, materialistic glory by wounding man’s pride through national division, which is consequent to the confusing of human communication, , God chose one nation among the many formed to be His Bride, the Hebrews.

But so, we have shown that if all evil came before Abraham, it can be summarized in the two principles we have seen above:

Anti-Baptismal Desire: no faith, no repentance

Anti-Marital Desire toward God: seeking the Creation, material glory, as one’s partner in spiritual prostitution instead of seeking Marriage with the Creator.

But then, consider this, returning to the evil, mocking, diabolical trinity: if the false prophet is the lies spoken between the father of lies and the evil ones of any age of sin in human history, look at the Symbolism: Christ, the Lamb, has seven horns, and the False Prophet has “two horns, like a Lamb.”

We know from theology of the Body that the devil mocks the good things of God, especially the sacraments. He mocks the Eucharist with gluttony and drunkenness. He mocks marriage with fornication.

Now couldn’t we see the seven horns of the Lamb as the seven sacraments, and that the false prophet is mocking two of them?

but which two? Well, as in the five loaves and two fish, heretics only have TWO sacraments, Baptism and Marriage, and we have seen that the antithesis of the base principles of these sacraments summarizes all evil in any age (since they summarize everything that came before Abraham), and so summarize the fall.

So then, why not see the false prophet’s two horns as the principles above, anti-Baptism and anti-marriage, which mock the base signs of all goodness.

For, think of it this way: if the Lamb’s seven sacraments are the sacred mysteries that He hands to the Holy Spirit to bring an abundance of charity to His Father’s children, so that they may attain to eternal bliss, what are the counterpart mysteries of darkness, of the fall, the lies of anti-Baptism and anti-Marriage, but those which sow the destruction of charity in the children of the evil one, and which lead them down the path, if unrepentant, to eternal fire and torment?

 

[ryanoneil]

The false prophet is given authority to make the people “worship the first beast” (Rev 13:12). The battle strategy of the Lamb is to sing a “new song” (Rev 5:9, 14:3), which is the eucharistic song of heaven. We join in this “song of the Lamb” (Rev 15:3) when we celebrate the Mass.

The verb form sang is a translation of the Greek word ado, and the noun form song is from the word ode. Other than the three times in Revelation, *ado and ode *are used only two other times in the New Testament. They are linked to eucharisteo which is the root of our word Eucharist, meaning “thanksgiving”.
**addressing one another (in) psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and playing to the Lord in your hearts, giving thanks always and for everything in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ to God the Father. (Eph 5:19-20)

Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly, as in all wisdom you teach and admonish one another, singing psalms, hymns, and spiritual songs with gratitude in your hearts to God. (Col 3:16)**

And if anyone missed it, the eucharistic song of the holy martyrs stirs the three angels to announce “Fear God and give Him glory, for the hour of His judgment has come” (Rev 14:7). And the singing of the Church in heaven stirs the seven angels to bring the seven bowls of plagues that proceed from God’s Temple (Rev 15). The Eucharist is the battle strategy of the Lamb and it is powerful.