S
Stephen_Butler
Guest
Are you 100% sure that I wasn’t sent here by the government to lull you into complacency?
- Status
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
Stephen Butler:
LOL
Good Point, matter of fact I believe 100% that you were sent here by Bushichrist and the Gates Prophet!
B
BlestOne
Guest
Funny, I always figured if I am not doing anything wrong, I have nothing to worry about. Yes we have the capability to do a great many things that would be considered an infringement to our privacy but gosh…do you really think you are that important that YOU (this is a general you not anyone specific) will be targeted? I know I’m not that important…besides, do you know how many folks would have to work for the gov’t for them to have the resources to process all that information? we’d all have gov’t jobs! As long as I am not forced to do anything immoral, why would I complain about extra security for our homeland? Everything is a trade off…If we had complete freedom…there would be no laws. If we had laws that protect us from everything…we would have no freedoms… etc. As for the mark of the beast… Why not be more concerned with the impact of Our Lord on our souls and pray that we will be protected by the power of the Holy Spirit?
R
ReformedCatholic
Guest
That’s correct. The emperor was Nero. The “mark of the beast” was referring to him.
S
spauline
Guest
Dear JezCat,
I would like to apologize for the harshness of my reply in this reply. I am sorry for attacking just you and for the somewhat mean way I replied. I have a tendency to get easily angered at things I perceive to be watering things down.
anyway, I just ask if you could forgive me. I will try to be more charitable in the future.
sincerely,
scott
I would like to apologize for the harshness of my reply in this reply. I am sorry for attacking just you and for the somewhat mean way I replied. I have a tendency to get easily angered at things I perceive to be watering things down.
anyway, I just ask if you could forgive me. I will try to be more charitable in the future.
sincerely,
scott
N
Nicene
Guest
JoeyWarren said:
Coincidence? Yep probably.
The only problem with this is the numbering of verses is a modern conception. Manuscripts themselves never had a numbering system, they read straight through. This projects onto the manuscripts something that was not originally there.
Revelation has 3 aspects. It is liturgical, it is resistance material, and it is prophetic. It contrasts worship of man (in this case the ceasers, 666 being Nero-nrwn qsr-(666) or nrw qsr (616) which are both found in early manuscripts. Transliterated into hebrew they both spell out Nero.) and worship of the one true God, the church in heaven and on earth reflecting the same worship.
It is also resistance material for christians being persecuted at the time, being forced to worship the emperors (martyrs sacrificed their lives because of this) John is telling them to hold fast and not submit. The book has to have relevance to the first century christian or it is pointless. Every prophetic book has this aspect, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekial, Danial etc. If it means nothing to the people of the time it has zero relevance to their understanding of God in their lives and his wishes for them at the time. And they have to be able to understand it’s symbolic language.
It is also prophetic telling about the end time. However we are going to have many antichrists throughout salvation history. There will be one big one, this concurs with the gospel accounts Christ gives. Yet if any of the accounts in the gospels are taken out of context with regard to Johns revelation then one or the other is in error, or we are. It’s a safe bet it is us.
To say the church hasn’t taught on this is incorrect. The church is amilenialist. We are just waiting for Christ to come.
Here is something interesting, Jesus name adds up to 888, any guess what day Christ rose from the dead? The number 7 is a perfect number in the bible, the number 6 is an imperfect number (i.e. man placing himself above God, or calling himself God) We are all in a sense 6’s, Christ lowered himself to humanity that we may rise to share in His divinity, bringing us to perfection because we are incapable of it on our own.
Right now we are about at chapter 20 in revelation, just waiting for the end to come. If any of the bits and pieces we like to look at in revelation contradict that which Christ states in the gospels, it is our error, nor scriptures.
Here is another modern mark of the beast, this one pretty real if you are really looking for this kind of stuff, in the sense that anyone can fall into it. George Washingtons picture (or Lincolns or Frankilins etc.) is a mark of the beast because idolatry is worshiping something that isn’t God. How many persue money in this country, how much emphasis do we place on it? Can’t buy or sell without it. Even with credit cards or checks, you still need the monetary amount from your paycheck to cover those bills. Nero’s picture was on all the money of the roman empire. To quote a phrase “It’s all about the Benjamins”
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
S
Semper_Fi_1
Guest
I would put forth that the book of Revelation and the mark of the beast, as well as Jesus’ rebuke of the pharisees in his “render unto caesar’s” speech all tie into the same thing. He was rebuking the pharisees because they were using money from the Roman Empire which worshipped the emperor as God. They were doing money changing in the Temple which contained the face of a false God. Also, we must remember that when the Jews said “we have no King but Caesar”, they were essentially worshipping him because they were assenting to his laws which required them to worship him as their God. All of this Dispensationalist stuff was created to scare unchatecised Catholics out of their Faith. Prophecy doesn’t mean that it hasn’t been fulfilled or that it isn’t being fulfilled, I would put forward that the “New Jerusalem” that was coming out of the Heavens referred specifically to the Church in Heaven meeting the Church on Earth. I also believe that the “one thousand year reign of Christ,” specifically refers to the Church and is symbolic as well.
N
Nicene
Guest
Semper Fi:
Which is interesting considering a dispensationalist point of view. In catholic belief Christ is already reigning in heaven and on earth, he defeated satan by His resurrection. So we are already in the thousand year riegn of Christ, just waiting for His coming a second time. Yet for the other view to be true, inherantly it says Christ can’t be reigning on earth i.e. He didn’t defeat satan.
Semper, I notice you are from Denver:
. I go to Our Lady of Loretto in Foxfield.
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
Which is interesting considering a dispensationalist point of view. In catholic belief Christ is already reigning in heaven and on earth, he defeated satan by His resurrection. So we are already in the thousand year riegn of Christ, just waiting for His coming a second time. Yet for the other view to be true, inherantly it says Christ can’t be reigning on earth i.e. He didn’t defeat satan.Semper, I notice you are from Denver:
. I go to Our Lady of Loretto in Foxfield.Peace and God Bless
Nicene
W
Wisdom
Guest
Nicene said:
Semper, I notice you are from Denver:
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
Very good point during the closing chapters of Revelation it has Christ brining down the New Jerusalem to earth. Ergo he’s bringing down his kingdom to earth it makes the whole millinium finally make sense and this is what Augustine and Origen before him were getting at, its not as difficult as dispensationlist are making it out to be. They have made eschatology far more complicated and convuluted they have an entire thelogy invested into their eschatology that is why they spend in extraordinary amount of time on this subject, so much that that they are really not earthly good, heck if they thought abut their fellow man as they think about eschatology they would do more good than the Missionaries of Charity with Mother Teressa at the helm but instead they sure waste a lot of time arguing over stupidity.
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
Semper Fi:
As stated also in the Bible that A day is like a thousand years and a thousand years like a day. The 1000 year reign of christ could just be 1 day in length to allow the gathering and judging of all.
J
JoeyWarren
Guest
Also it gives the measurements of the New Jerusalem as being 1000 cubits by 1000 cubits by 1000 cubits. The 1000 number could just symbolic of infiniteness. IE The reign of Christ will be Infinite and the New Jerusalem will be Infinite.
S
spauline
Guest
Revelation has 3 aspects. It is liturgical,…
It is also resistance material for christians being persecuted at the time, …
It is also prophetic telling about the end time. …
Dear Nicene,
I would like to suggest that there are other layers of meaning possible:
I. Idealism: a metaphor for the constant trial and tribulation the Church goes through over and over again in her history, as well as deep spiritual metaphors that are linked to Genesis and types of things that occur over the whole of Salvation history, including the OT.
II. Historicism: a prophetic outline of the spiritual ages of the ENTIRE history of the Church, from pagan Rome to the AntiChirst.
To say the church hasn’t taught on this is incorrect. The church is amilenialist. We are just waiting for Christ to come.
As far as I know, the Church has only tended to be Amill, but Postmill remains an additional possibility,–or at least the idea that there will be TWO main apostasies in Church history, in between which lies a glorious Age of Peace and restoration of Catholicism. That, in fact, is my position, and “I’m stickin’ to it” until the Church rules it out. BTW, I don’t think they will because:
I. Some ECF’s who are, according to Father Iannuzzi (who writes on the Millennium), falsely accused of being chiliasts, actually discuss THREE (not two) ages of the New Covenant: the age of the Church, the age of the Millennium (Sabbath-“like” Rest) and the New Creation (the “true” Sabbath), which, when aligned with the five ages of the Old Law, form eight ages, the same as the days of creation and the “kings” of the ***beast ***(see Rev. 17:9-11)
For example, St. Methodius:
“Five are the ages of the old law, the sixth age is designated to the Church, the seventh is the millennium of rest [when Christ will reign over the earth], and the eighth designates the eternity of heaven” (New Catholic Encyclopedia, Ibid., Vol. IX, p. 742)
St. Augustine elaborates, testifying to the five ages of the Old Law, and associates the three ages of the Jews with the New Covenant (see the bolded text below):
[url="http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/1303.htm":
]
39. "Five ages of the world, accordingly, having been now completed (there has entered the sixth). Of these ages the first is from the beginning of the human race, that is, from Adam, who was the first man that was made, down to Noah, who constructed the ark at the time of the flood. Then the second extends from that period on to Abraham, who was called the father indeed of all nations which should follow the example of his faith, but who at the same time in the way of natural descent from his own flesh was the father of the destined people of the Jews; which people, previous to the entrance of the Gentiles into the Christian faith, was the one people among all the nations of all lands that worshipped the one true God: from which people also Christ the Saviour was decreed to come according to the flesh. For these turning-points of those two ages occupy an eminent place in the ancient books. On the other hand, those of the other three ages are also declared in the Gospel, where the descent of the Lord Jesus Christ according to the flesh is likewise mentioned. For the third age extends from Abraham on to David the king; the **fourth **from David on to that captivity whereby the people of God passed over into Babylonia; and the fifth from that transmigration down to the advent of our Lord Jesus Christ.
continued…
S
spauline
Guest
… continued
Hence, the three ages of the Jewish history is perhaps a type of the history of the Church.
This is also fitting, for the Book of Rev. has three main parts, not *two. *The Seals, the Trumpets, the Bowls.
The dragon is defeated three primary times, not two:
a. cast from heaven to earth
b. chained in the abyss
c. cast permanently into lake of fire
Also, the saints in general traverse three stages in their way, not merely two:
a. The Purgative (concluded with dark night of senses)
b. The Illuminative (concluded with the dark night of the soul)
c. The Unitive (concluded with “martyrdom”)
for more info, see here.
Also, to elaborate on the dragon parts, Christ already reigns in the beginning of Rev. 12 (“and he was caught up to God and His Throne” Rev. 12:5). Hence, the Death Resurrection and Ascension of Christ is already present here, and He is reigning, although the dragon is not yet chained in the abyss. Now, granted, I am not contesting amill as one layer of meaning, but I also suggest that the whole sequences of the dragon can be interpreted in a partially allegorical sense across all of Church history, so that the Millennium is more appropriately the Age of Peace of the mystics and not the whole era of the Church.
Finally, according to EWTN scholars Donovan and Birch, the best scenario we can get from the mystics also involves this: a minor apostasy and subsequent Age of Peace to precede the Great apostasy of the very end:
Hence, the three ages of the Jewish history is perhaps a type of the history of the Church.
This is also fitting, for the Book of Rev. has three main parts, not *two. *The Seals, the Trumpets, the Bowls.
The dragon is defeated three primary times, not two:
a. cast from heaven to earth
b. chained in the abyss
c. cast permanently into lake of fire
Also, the saints in general traverse three stages in their way, not merely two:
a. The Purgative (concluded with dark night of senses)
b. The Illuminative (concluded with the dark night of the soul)
c. The Unitive (concluded with “martyrdom”)
for more info, see here.
Also, to elaborate on the dragon parts, Christ already reigns in the beginning of Rev. 12 (“and he was caught up to God and His Throne” Rev. 12:5). Hence, the Death Resurrection and Ascension of Christ is already present here, and He is reigning, although the dragon is not yet chained in the abyss. Now, granted, I am not contesting amill as one layer of meaning, but I also suggest that the whole sequences of the dragon can be interpreted in a partially allegorical sense across all of Church history, so that the Millennium is more appropriately the Age of Peace of the mystics and not the whole era of the Church.
Finally, according to EWTN scholars Donovan and Birch, the best scenario we can get from the mystics also involves this: a minor apostasy and subsequent Age of Peace to precede the Great apostasy of the very end:
Sorry for the diatribe, I just feel there is more to Revelation than preterist, amill, coded-comfort.
S
spauline
Guest
Oh, and Nicene, one more thing: for more evidence from ECFs about the ages of the world being eight and associated with the days of creation and the beast, you can read these on my blog:
More evidence for the seven days/heads
Historicism and the Seven Days/Heads
GB!
More evidence for the seven days/heads
Historicism and the Seven Days/Heads
GB!
N
Nicene
Guest
Never said there weren’t, but these are the main themes.
Don’t disagree, shortened it to antichrists throughout history, which infers tribulation in the church. However I wasn’t attempting to disect all of revelation in my post. The thread pertains to the “Mark of the beast”
In a braod sense yes. It applies to all centuries of christians which does not exclude first century christians, it’s primary audience, particularly asia minor.
see the catechism below # 676
While I appreciate the use of the word “testifying” it implies this is the universal belief of the church, when in fact it was and is not.
Two things are glossed over here in your presentation. First as highlighed above, it is “not” catholic doctrine, Second it “is” private revelation, which is not binding as doctrine on the church. Refer to the catechism on the section referencing private revelation vs. public revelation.
From the catechism: 676 is an important one, so highlighted.
cont.
N
Nicene
Guest
Why do you think what the church believes and teaches is coded comfort. We don’t get to escape tribulation, and there is going to be a mass apostacy. I see no coded comfort in that personally. It in fact states a hard reality that will occur, and that we are to persist and persevere until the end.
Mary at Fatima says nothing that conflicts with how God has interacted with man throughout history. Mary urges conversion and peace, but mainly faithful prayer to appease Gods wrath, which occurs in scripture numerous times in remnants of Isreal. Christ can come at any moment and we are to be always prepared. I would also suggest the writings of Sr. Faustina. There is no coded comfort in what the church is teaching above, just the opposite.
Dispensationalism is the coded comfort, escaping the tribulation by a mass exodus of souls at a secret coming of Christ.
cont.
N
Nicene
Guest
Revelation is not a step by step timeline of events. The 3 sections you refer to in fact overlap, unless of course the inference is that the lamb in chapter 5 isn’t Christ triumphant:
Rev 5:12: saying with a loud voice, “Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!” 13: And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all therein, saying, “To him who sits upon the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might for ever and ever!” 14: And the four living creatures said, “Amen!” and the elders fell down and worshiped. (This is also an example of the church militant and the church triumphant prasing the true God contrasted later by men who worship men: false Gods or any other type of false God, money for example)
Sorry for the diatribe, but Revelation has a lot of material, too much for this small thread. Again the thrust of the thread is the “Mark of the beast” Unfortunately the 3 age (dispensation) theory is at odds with what Christ reveals in the gospels.
If a discussion of the symbology of revelation and all it’s aspects want to be explored, I would suggest it for another thread so as not to derail this one.
I am quite versed in the church fathers, an interesting read for you may be “The epistle of Barnabas” pertaining to the section regarding 6 days and 6000 years.
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
Rev 5:12: saying with a loud voice, “Worthy is the Lamb who was slain, to receive power and wealth and wisdom and might and honor and glory and blessing!” 13: And I heard every creature in heaven and on earth and under the earth and in the sea, and all therein, saying, “To him who sits upon the throne and to the Lamb be blessing and honor and glory and might for ever and ever!” 14: And the four living creatures said, “Amen!” and the elders fell down and worshiped. (This is also an example of the church militant and the church triumphant prasing the true God contrasted later by men who worship men: false Gods or any other type of false God, money for example)
Sorry for the diatribe, but Revelation has a lot of material, too much for this small thread. Again the thrust of the thread is the “Mark of the beast” Unfortunately the 3 age (dispensation) theory is at odds with what Christ reveals in the gospels.
If a discussion of the symbology of revelation and all it’s aspects want to be explored, I would suggest it for another thread so as not to derail this one.
I am quite versed in the church fathers, an interesting read for you may be “The epistle of Barnabas” pertaining to the section regarding 6 days and 6000 years.
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
N
Nicene
Guest
Taking revelation out of it’s time and applying it only to today or prophetically for tomarrow robs it of it’s beauty and it’s relevance not only to the first century, but to all succeeding generations, including today. In effect it marginalizes the writing.
A minor example: why are only 7 churches mentioned (one of them being St. Timothy’s) in Asia Minor when there were also Troas, Colossae, and Hierapolis? Or is John trying to draw significance to something?
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
A minor example: why are only 7 churches mentioned (one of them being St. Timothy’s) in Asia Minor when there were also Troas, Colossae, and Hierapolis? Or is John trying to draw significance to something?
Peace and God Bless
Nicene
S
spauline
Guest
Dear Nicene,
Thank you for replying. I am sorry, I don’t think I included enough explanation in what I posted, and so it is not your fault that you have perhaps misinterpreted me.
First, by “coded-comfort”, I did not mean that the Church says we will not need to suffer or go through tribulation. I was referring to the level of interp that sees the Book as “comforting” by “code” literature the Early Christians who were in fact suffering horribly under pagan Rome’s persecutions. In that regard, I’ve read all of what you posted on the Catechism. I know all that. So, yes, I fully realize that general Church teaching, not only on the Apoc, is that we must share the cross of Christ in one form or another and that the Church will in fact go through all these tribulations.
Secondly, I am well aware that Revelation is multi-layered and multi-dimensional and overlapsmany, many times. Yes, thank you for pointing that out, I didn’t mean to deny that. That’s why I said, “now, i don’t deny amill one one level,” that is, I realize that Revelation 12 and Revelation 20 can both be talking about the entire era of the Church from different viewpoints. Yes, I realize that Rev 12 shows Christ reigning in Heaven, and yet the devil fights with Him and His Church, symbolizing that there is still opposition to Christ, even though the victory is already won. And that Revelation 20, on the other hand, shows that Christ reigns “on earth” through His Church. Yes, I don’t deny these interps. Certainly all valid.
I was just suggesting that another way (without denying this original way above) to look at the sections of the dragon can be somewhat time linear, showing progressive victories over the devil as Christ applies His already-completed Redemption to the human race through His Church in the history of the Church. That is, though Christ’s victory is past tense in one sense, there is still the reality that it must be applied to the human race in and through the Redemptive action of the Church in her history. Hence we say, as Karl K. advises us, “I was saved, I am being saved, and I hope to be saved.” Hence, believing that the Book in some sense addresses this process must certainly be acceptable in the RCC.
Thirdly, I do realize that the Church understands really only two primary dispensations, the Old and the New, and that, therefore the age of the Church proper is the Last age (prior to the New Creation at end of time). What I was talking about is discerning SUB-ages within these great ones, and not in the sense of dispensations as the Fundamentalists speak of, as if to imply that God judges men by different principles in different epochs, or that the Jews have a different eschatological destiny than the RCC, or any other of that bad stuff of the Fundies. For I realize that God has always expected the same thing in principle from men: to obey (with His help) the light that has been given to them.
For example, doesn’t one of the Eucharistic prayers say something like “…which, in every age,….” That is, even though this era of the Church is the final BIG era, is it not possible that there can still be SUB-ages within it? As another example, any book on Church history will be divided into epochs, such as:
The Age of the Martyrs (pagan Rome)
The Age of Initial Heresies (Nicea through Great Schism)
The Middle Ages (Height of Catholic Christendom)
The Protestant Rebellion
The “Enlightenment”
The Modern Secular Apostasy
Are/were these not sub-ages of this great final age? In that vein, perhaps you could clarify your statement that the Church now condemns the statements from Augustine? If so, in what WAY do they? Are they denying even that there are SUB-epochs of the Old Law as there are SUB-epochs of the New Law.
cont…
Thank you for replying. I am sorry, I don’t think I included enough explanation in what I posted, and so it is not your fault that you have perhaps misinterpreted me.
First, by “coded-comfort”, I did not mean that the Church says we will not need to suffer or go through tribulation. I was referring to the level of interp that sees the Book as “comforting” by “code” literature the Early Christians who were in fact suffering horribly under pagan Rome’s persecutions. In that regard, I’ve read all of what you posted on the Catechism. I know all that. So, yes, I fully realize that general Church teaching, not only on the Apoc, is that we must share the cross of Christ in one form or another and that the Church will in fact go through all these tribulations.
Secondly, I am well aware that Revelation is multi-layered and multi-dimensional and overlapsmany, many times. Yes, thank you for pointing that out, I didn’t mean to deny that. That’s why I said, “now, i don’t deny amill one one level,” that is, I realize that Revelation 12 and Revelation 20 can both be talking about the entire era of the Church from different viewpoints. Yes, I realize that Rev 12 shows Christ reigning in Heaven, and yet the devil fights with Him and His Church, symbolizing that there is still opposition to Christ, even though the victory is already won. And that Revelation 20, on the other hand, shows that Christ reigns “on earth” through His Church. Yes, I don’t deny these interps. Certainly all valid.
I was just suggesting that another way (without denying this original way above) to look at the sections of the dragon can be somewhat time linear, showing progressive victories over the devil as Christ applies His already-completed Redemption to the human race through His Church in the history of the Church. That is, though Christ’s victory is past tense in one sense, there is still the reality that it must be applied to the human race in and through the Redemptive action of the Church in her history. Hence we say, as Karl K. advises us, “I was saved, I am being saved, and I hope to be saved.” Hence, believing that the Book in some sense addresses this process must certainly be acceptable in the RCC.
Thirdly, I do realize that the Church understands really only two primary dispensations, the Old and the New, and that, therefore the age of the Church proper is the Last age (prior to the New Creation at end of time). What I was talking about is discerning SUB-ages within these great ones, and not in the sense of dispensations as the Fundamentalists speak of, as if to imply that God judges men by different principles in different epochs, or that the Jews have a different eschatological destiny than the RCC, or any other of that bad stuff of the Fundies. For I realize that God has always expected the same thing in principle from men: to obey (with His help) the light that has been given to them.
For example, doesn’t one of the Eucharistic prayers say something like “…which, in every age,….” That is, even though this era of the Church is the final BIG era, is it not possible that there can still be SUB-ages within it? As another example, any book on Church history will be divided into epochs, such as:
The Age of the Martyrs (pagan Rome)
The Age of Initial Heresies (Nicea through Great Schism)
The Middle Ages (Height of Catholic Christendom)
The Protestant Rebellion
The “Enlightenment”
The Modern Secular Apostasy
Are/were these not sub-ages of this great final age? In that vein, perhaps you could clarify your statement that the Church now condemns the statements from Augustine? If so, in what WAY do they? Are they denying even that there are SUB-epochs of the Old Law as there are SUB-epochs of the New Law.
cont…
S
spauline
Guest
…cont
Anyway, then, I don’t see what would stop us from discerning SUB ages of the two great ages in a manner that is not like heretical Dispensationalism. Then, in that view, the ages are easily typified in the days of creation: each day is first darkness “evening came”, sinful resistance to God or His Plan and People] and then light “morning followed”, God’s Redemption of the sinful stage]. From this view, what is then wrong with the following three “days” for the Church?:
DAY I:
DAY I:
Finally, I know that we need not believe a letter of Private Rev and that the Age of Peace is merely a possible scenario from mystics and is NOT YET Catholic doctrine. Yes, I know that. Hence, I was not saying you HAVE to be postmill, only that a Catholic can believe in a two- apostasy scenario instead of just one with amill. But I don’t see why the Church couldn’t discover that the Scriptures prefigure or foretell the intermediate apostasy and subsequent age of peace through doctrinal development. After all, if the Book of Rev can be a prophecy of the whole Church age, what is to stop it from foretelling it and the Church coming to see it in there as doctrine develops?
Anyway, God Bless you, Nicene, perhaps you could respond to this with any insights or corrections for me?
Scott
Anyway, then, I don’t see what would stop us from discerning SUB ages of the two great ages in a manner that is not like heretical Dispensationalism. Then, in that view, the ages are easily typified in the days of creation: each day is first darkness “evening came”, sinful resistance to God or His Plan and People] and then light “morning followed”, God’s Redemption of the sinful stage]. From this view, what is then wrong with the following three “days” for the Church?:
DAY I:
- The sun sets: Pagan Rome persecutes
- The sun rises: Catholicism converts Europe
- The sun sets: Minor Apostasy (last 500 years developing)
- The sun rises: Age of Peace, near Total Restoration of Catholic Faith
- The sun sets: Great Apostasy and NT Antichrist
- The sun rises: Second Coming and New Creation
DAY I:
- The sun sets: Egypt enslaves
- The sun rises: the Exodus and establishment of Israel
- The sun sets: the Jews Minor Apostasy
- The sun rises: Babylonian Exile and Restoration of Old Covenant
- The sun sets: Second Jewish Apostasy and OT Antichrist (Antiochus/Maccabbees)
- The sun rises: First Coming of Christ
Finally, I know that we need not believe a letter of Private Rev and that the Age of Peace is merely a possible scenario from mystics and is NOT YET Catholic doctrine. Yes, I know that. Hence, I was not saying you HAVE to be postmill, only that a Catholic can believe in a two- apostasy scenario instead of just one with amill. But I don’t see why the Church couldn’t discover that the Scriptures prefigure or foretell the intermediate apostasy and subsequent age of peace through doctrinal development. After all, if the Book of Rev can be a prophecy of the whole Church age, what is to stop it from foretelling it and the Church coming to see it in there as doctrine develops?
Anyway, God Bless you, Nicene, perhaps you could respond to this with any insights or corrections for me?
Scott
- Status