The Two Olive Branches

[Theoferrum]

Could it be that the two olive trees represent Christians and Jews, a la St. Paul in the Epistle to the Romans? Israel is still God’s first born, and they will be saved (Rom. 11:25-26), so are they not also anointed?

You present an interesting analysis.

God bless,
Charles

It may be possible. Moses would personify the Old Testament Saints and one of the Olive Branches and Elijah would personify the New Testament Saints as the other branch - both “stood before the Lord of the whole earth” at the Mount of Transfiguration.

Now, that said, the True Church has been engrafted into the Commonwealth or Kingdom of Israel (Rom 11) and thus the Church would also manifest a two-fold division. Further, per the letters in Revelation, there is also a Seven Fold division based upon the Seven Fold Spirit. I have tenatively identified this seven fold division and all of the Apostolic Denominations (ones that manifest Apostolic Authority via incorruptibility of the saints - Catholic, Orthodox and Oriental - as well as valid cases of the Stigmata) can find themselves in one of these seven churches.

Here is the List which is supported by the individual history of each church as well as the descriptions given which find counterparts in the Liturgical Life of each of these churches - this is an ongoing project for myself at this time. The list below, by the way, is a seven fold division recognized by the Catholic Catechism.

Ephesus - Latin
Smyrna - Armenian
Pergamum - Chaldean
Thyatira - Byzantine
Sardis - Alexandrian
Philedelphia - Antiochene
Laodacea - Maronite

Here is my rough draft of the material above that I am still working on :

theoferrumii.geocities.master.com/texis/master/search/showmsg.html?id=4a636c4b20&Catid=46e6eae43

 

[Theoferrum]

I am one of the olive branches. It is a couple of years early before my days of preaching. The day of the Lord is coming soon. Please pray for me, the woman who flees into the wilderness to have a male child, and the other olive branch.

The Two Olive Branches are Moses and Elijah who, “stood before the Lord of the whole earth” at the Mount of Transfiguration. You obviously have a strong sense of destiny but Scripturally you are not one of the Two Branches mentioned.

 

[Theoferrum]

The Fathers of the Church from early times have taught that the two Olive Trees and the Two lamp stands of the Book of the Apocalypse are “types” of Enoch (Henoch) and Elijah. Both of these men did not die, but “were taken” and are mysteriously with God until the time of their future, brutal martyrdom by the Anti-Christ.

Correct. However, there is ample indication that, in fact, Moses is the first witness with Elijah the second. Both were last seen alive on the Mountains of Nebo, both stood before the Lord of the whole earth at the transfiguration. Moses, though he actually died, was still in his prime at the time of death and his body was disputed by Satan who realm or kingdom is that of death which implies a possible resusitation and a catching up into heaven (hidden as was Y’shua’s ascension as far as the world and nation of Israel was conderned).

Enoch (book of Genesis) pleased God in the days before Noah’s flood, long before the Hebrews were chosen to be God’s people. He therefore is the righteous gentiles’ prophet witnessing to God’s eternal truth in natural law by his preaching and martyrdom.

And, as such, he is more typical of the Gentile Church as opposed to Elijah as you mention later.

This is not to say that other interpretations --as the felicitious one proposed above, --of the Eastern and Western branches of the Church Universal, do not apply in a metaphorical sense–.

Correct. If I am not mistaken, the Catechism recognizes for possible interpretation of the Word. Literal, Metaforical, Allegorial and Spiritual. Point is, Israel was ‘divided’ into two - Judah and Ephraim. The Levitical Priesthood was divided into two - Aaronic and Levitiacal. There were Two Stone Tablets and, unknown to most people, Two Arks of the Covenants (to hold the two sets of Tablets) and Two Tabernacles (to house the Arks). They made two attempts to enter the promises land, etc. Thus the Church, since it is engrafted into the commonwealth of Israel, also has a two fold division. This division, by the way, also corresponds to the Iron (Roman) and Brass (Greecian) divisions mentioned by the Prophet Daniel.

The prophecies of the Bible are fulfilled in different eras in different ways until the definitive and final and literal fulfillment. Remember what Jesus said of John the Baptist? He and his desciples were aware of the prophecy that “Elijah must come before the last day”-- and Jesus said that John came “in the spirit of Elijah”, for the coming of Jesus was the coming of the Kingdom, only people didn’t recognize it as such.

Correct. This would be the Spiritual Interpretation of the Passage.

However at the FINAL coming of Jesus at the end of time, Elijah in person will return to tell the Jews that Jesus is indeed the messiah --along with Enoch preaching the same message to the unconverted non-Jews. These are the two olive trees whose continual prayers for the human race --both Jews and Gentiles-- are (symbolically) olive oil flowing from the living trees. [BIBLEDRB][/BIBLEDRB]

And this would be the Literal Interpretation.

 

[Theoferrum]

Let me give you an example of my interpretation of the seven churches. Ephesus, if they did not repent, was destined to have its candlestick moved from its place. I have identified the modern counterpart as the Latin Roman Church and, what happened to the Papacy?

It was moved to Avignon…

 

[grace_singh]

Let me give you an example of my interpretation of the seven churches. Ephesus, if they did not repent, was destined to have its candlestick moved from its place. I have identified the modern counterpart as the Latin Roman Church and, what happened to the Papacy?

It was moved to Avignon…

Theoferrum ~

you have a really interesting idea, and the Catholic and Orthodox Churches may be a type of the symbolism demonstrated by the olive branches.

but be careful about reading too much into the text, and formulating theories based on what you see within the text, as opposed to what the text actually says.

i once attended a class about the Book of Revelation, and was amazed at the amount of “maybes”, “i thinks” and “perhapses” during the lecture. Revelation is of course rich in symbolism and characters, and it’s important to make a distinction between what you think the text means, and what the text says.

 

[Theoferrum]

The problem with the interpretation given is that there is nothing in the text or tradition to suggest such an interpretation.

Perhaps you have heard of letting the Scripture interpret Scripture. Paul, speaking by the Spirit, applies the metaphor of the Olive Branches to the Church and John, speaking by the Spirit, applies the Metaphor of the Seven Candlesticks to the Church. Exactly what part of that interpretation do you not understand?

THis is a case of READING INTO the text an interpretation you want to fulfill a deep need for there to be only one church. I know, because I have thought of what you said about the Eucharist endlessly.

“The same judgment you judge others with, you are guilty of yourself” which you go on to admit. I do not want to see the Church become one church for I already stated it is divided into Orthodox and Catholic - something pretty much everyone in the world knows about - and, further, it is also divided into Seven Lamps and the Catechism, produced by the Magisterium, has divided the Catholic Church up into exactly seven groups. Not one, per se, as you refer to - I would guess in reference to ecumenicalism. I, unlike some people, already recognize that there is only One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, I just include the Orthodox in that, as the Scripture suggest.

But any unity we seek with the Orthodox must be based on TRUTH. The TRUTH of history, the TRUTH of the Fathers and the Truth of the Scriptures. We cannot have peace at any price; it is disingenuous.It is necessary for those who are wrong ( only one can be wrong because Christ would not let his true church believe a lie) to acknowledge their error and to establish a communion of respect, submission (within reasonable limits, not serfdom) and mutual acknowledgement of the inadequacy of language.

As with the Premillenial Faith which both Catholics and Orthodox have discarded?

The more I read the Orthodox writers and the Roman Catholic writers, it’s like I get more “in the head” of the other side, and we are both saying the same thing but we only want OUR side to be right.

I agree. That is why I say that they are both right. You are the one that just got done saying one of them is wrong, not me.

I, however, would say that the Protestants are Heretics and until they repent and return to (one of the) True Church, they are not part of the Church and, thus, again, you have two main divisions of the Church - Catholic and Orthodos - and all true churches can find themselves in their somewhere but they all belong to the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, as the Incorruptibles prove.

 

[Theoferrum]

Theoferrum ~
be careful about reading too much into the text, and formulating theories based on what you see within the text, as opposed to what the text actually says.

i once attended a class about the Book of Revelation, and was amazed at the amount of “maybes”, “i thinks” and “perhapses” during the lecture. Revelation is of course rich in symbolism and characters, and it’s important to make a distinction between what you think the text means, and what the text says.

See my last reply which addresses your anixety…

 

[Theoferrum]

Only God can “square this circle” but with God nothing is impossible: and one day the Church of the East and of the West will be harmoniously one, with no doctrinal differences. We do not know when and how this will be, but we know that it will be and so I am at peace praying for the eventual Christian unity which will see the end of all heresy among honest men of good will. Peace, my brother !

He already did via the Metaphors of the Scriptures - see second reply above.

 

[Theoferrum]

*The Colors of Faith : The Seven Churches of the Revelation :

theoferrumii.geocities.master.com/texis/master/search/showmsg.html?id=4a636c4b20&Catid=46e6eae43

Ephesus : Latin - Roman - would include the Tridentine Churches

**Smyrna : Armenian **- Armenian Catholic Church, Armenian Orthodox (Apostolic) Church, Armenian (Oriental) Apostolic

Pergamum : Chaldean (East Syrian) - Chaldean Catholic Church, Syro-Malabar Catholic Church (with the Italio-Albanian these are the only two Eastern Catholic Churches that have always been in full communion with Rome), Chaldean Orthodox Church, Chaldean Syrian Church (Assyrian Church of the East), Chaldean Syrian Church, Persian Church

Thyatira : Byzantine - Albanian Greek Catholic Church, Belarusian Greek Catholic Church, Bulgarian Greek Catholic Church, Orthodox Church of Serbia, Orthodox Church of Slovakia, Orthodox Church of (the) Czechs, Georgian Byzantine Rite Catholics, Orthodox Church of Georgia (very strong connections to the Armenian Church as well), Orthodox Church of Albania, Orthodox Church of Poland, Orthodox Church of Cyprus, Byzantine of ZKrizevli, Greek Byzantine Catholic Church, Hungarian Greek Catholic Church, Italio-Albanian Catholic Church, Macedonian Greek Catholic Church, Melkite Greek Catholic Church, Romanian Greek Catholic Church, Russian Catholic Church, Ruthenian Catholic Church, Slovak Greek Catholic Church, Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church, Russian Orthodox Church, Estonian Orthodox Church (in America), Byzantine Orthodox Church, Ukrainian Orhtodox Church, Romanian Orthodox Church, Bulgarian Orthodox Church, Orthodox Church of Greece, Orthodox Patriarch of Jerusalem

Sardis : Alexandrian - Coptic Catholic Church, Ethiopian Catholic Church, Coptic Orthodox Church, Ethiopian Orthodox Church, Orthodox Church of Alexandria, Coptic (Oriental) Orthodox, Ethiopian (Oriental) Orthodox, Eritrean (Oriental) Orthodox

Philedelphia : Antiochene - Syriac Catholic Church, Syro-Malankara Catholic Church, Antiochene Orthodox Church, Syriac Orthodox Church, Malankara (part of the Antiochene Archdiocese), Jacobite Syrian Orthodox, Orthodox Church of Antioch, Syriac (Oriental) Orthodox, Malankara (Oriental) Orthodox Syrian Church

Laodacea : Maronite - There are no Orthodox counterparts to the Maronites which is an exclusively Catholic Church.*

 

[Theoferrum]

Beirut (pretty much the capital of the Maronites - that is where my sponsor was from who is a Maronite) was known as the Laodicea in Phoenicia…

 

[gambling88]

The Two Olive Branches are Moses and Elijah who, “stood before the Lord of the whole earth” at the Mount of Transfiguration. You obviously have a strong sense of destiny but Scripturally you are not one of the Two Branches mentioned.

I will not continue to argue about this. Peace
Theodore Aaron Biscan

 

[Leo_The_Great]

Theoferrum, you are deep in error. It may be on only one point, but one is enough.

You said

“As with the Premillenial Faith which both Catholics and Orthodox have discarded?”

This is heresy. The Orthodox may have discarded tenets of the Pre-millenial faith, but the Catholic Church at ROme as always held fast to every doctrinal tenent of the faith.

Your Opinion is bordering on a kind of restorationism which is the claims of Protestants, Mormons, Jehova’s witnesses and some Charismatic Catholics.

“Well, the Church had it right at first, but then it messed up. But HERE is the real teaching…”

On this basis you cannot be taken seriously. You should retract the statement or explain it.

 

[Theoferrum]

Theoferrum, you are deep in error. It may be on only one point, but one is enough.

You said

“As with the Premillenial Faith which both Catholics and Orthodox have discarded?”

This is heresy. The Orthodox may have discarded tenets of the Pre-millenial faith, but the Catholic Church at ROme as always held fast to every doctrinal tenent of the faith.

Your Opinion is bordering on a kind of restorationism which is the claims of Protestants, Mormons, Jehova’s witnesses and some Charismatic Catholics.

“Well, the Church had it right at first, but then it messed up. But HERE is the real teaching…”

On this basis you cannot be taken seriously. You should retract the statement or explain it.

Go back and read your catechism, homey. The Catechism acknowledges that some of the Church fathers were of this persuasion. It goes on to say that people should avoid the title for some have used the doctrine to embrace an unbiblical “secular messianism” and that led them, of course, to bash the Catholic Church.

 

[Theoferrum]

Theoferrum, you are deep in error. It may be on only one point, but one is enough.

You said

“As with the Premillenial Faith which both Catholics and Orthodox have discarded?”

This is heresy. The Orthodox may have discarded tenets of the Pre-millenial faith, but the Catholic Church at ROme as always held fast to every doctrinal tenent of the faith.

Your Opinion is bordering on a kind of restorationism which is the claims of Protestants, Mormons, Jehova’s witnesses and some Charismatic Catholics.

“Well, the Church had it right at first, but then it messed up. But HERE is the real teaching…”

On this basis you cannot be taken seriously. You should retract the statement or explain it.

Here’s the reference, in case you missed it and, once again, the age old adage is proved - “the same judgment you judge others with, you are guilty of yourself” and, “on this basis you cannot be taken seriously.”

I guess you have some explaining to do…

*What’s the Catholic Position?

As far as the millennium goes, we tend to agree with Augustine and, derivatively, with the amillennialists. The Catholic position has thus historically been “amillennial” (as has been the majority Christian position in general, including that of the Protestant Reformers), though Catholics do not typically use this term. The Church has rejected the premillennial position, sometimes called “millenarianism” (see the Catechism of the Catholic Church 676). In the 1940s the Holy Office judged that premillennialism “cannot safely be taught,” though the Church has not dogmatically defined this issue.

catholic.com/library/Rapture.asp*

 

[Leo_The_Great]

Ok, my bad, I see what you’re talking about, the belief in Premillenarianism.

I thought you were talking about the “Premillenial Faith.” i.e. The Catholic Church’s faith before 1000 a.d.

I thought you were saying the Faith could change.

I was wrong, you were talking about theological speculation on millenarianism.

I retract everything I said.

Sorry.

 

[Alveus_Lacuna]

Those two would fall under the same side of the coin, if you will. There is virtually no difference between the two except semantics over the hypostatic union which has been publicly acknowledged between the two.

The differences are real and they matter. People died over those differences, and they are not merely the product of linguistic misunderstandings and political tensions between different regions. Those were certainly factors in the disputes, but if it is so obvious that there is really no difference, then full communion would have already have been restored. Strike that. If there was no real difference in Christology, then no split would have ever taken place.

The Church is One, from the beginning until now.

 

[Theoferrum]

The differences are real and they matter. People died over those differences, and they are not merely the product of linguistic misunderstandings and political tensions between different regions. Those were certainly factors in the disputes, but if it is so obvious that there is really no difference, then full communion would have already have been restored. Strike that. If there was no real difference in Christology, then no split would have ever taken place.

The Church is One, from the beginning until now.

The difference was one of semantics - the belief is virtually the same. The Orthodox and the Orientals have brought forth a statement to that very effect.

But, you missed the point I made above. If the Church is one from the beginning until now - meaning that it believes exactly as it always has - then you need to look at the Premillenial Faith which Catholics, Orthodox and Orientals have discarded which was the faith of the Apostolic Church.

 

[StRaphael]

Who are the Two Olive Branches mentioned?

Well, since the Apostle Paul compares the Church to the Olive Branches (wild) that have been grafted into the commonwealth of Israel, then this can only be refering to the Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church.

**In other words, both are part of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church… **

You must be careful in how you phrase things. The Catholic Church is not a part of the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church; she is the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church 3Unitatis Redintegratio; 16-17Dominus Iesus]. Note especially the following from paragraph 11 of the Letter to the Presidents of the Conferences of Bishops: Note On the Expression “Sister Churches,” in Rome, June 30, 2000: “Consequently, one should avoid, as a source of misunderstanding and theological confusion, the use of formulations such as «our two Churches,» which, if applied to the Catholic Church and the totality of Orthodox Churches (or a single Orthodox Church), imply a plurality not merely on the level of particular Churches, but also on the level of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church confessed in the Creed, whose real existence is thus obscured.”

May God bless you and yours with health, holiness, and happiness!

 

[sidbrown]

The Church is One, from the beginning until now.

Actually the Church is not one, but it is split up and cannot make ep its mind on serious issues such as whether or not the filioque should be said in the creed. One part of the Church says yea, while another part says no.

 

[Aramis]

Actually the Church is not one, but it is split up and cannot make ep its mind on serious issues such as whether or not the filioque should be said in the creed. One part of the Church says yea, while another part says no.

The Church actually has a clear policy… In latin and english within the Western rites, yes, because of arianism (and a couple other heresies) and its (their) cultural prominence. In the other rites, no.