Posted on 07/03/2025 5:38:42 PM PDT by Angelino97
I have just finished reading “The Old Covenant: Revoked or Not Revoked?” by Dr. Robert Sungenis. It is a study debunking the notion, now regnant in liberal theological circles, that the Old Covenant still stands side-by-side with the New Covenant.
According to this novelty, in essence, God’s “A Plan” and God’s “B Plan” are both currently pleasing to Him and both fully in effect.
Opposed to this, the Catholic Faith teaches that the Old Law — itself good, holy, and of divine origin — was a preparation for the New, and that the New Law superceded and fulfilled the Old.
Indeed, as Dr. Sungenis shows, Pope John Paul II affirmed the traditional teaching in a not-much-quoted passage of Redemptoris Mater: “Christ fulfills the divine promise and supersedes the old law.”
Years ago, I made an effort at debunking this vogue theology in an article on the Epistle to the Hebrews: A Better Testament. Dr. Sungenis quotes from Hebrews, but he does not limit himself to this, as the pilfered quotations below adequately show.
The following is a series of scriptural, patristic, and magisterial citations from “The Old Covenant: Revoked or Not Revoked?“:
Hebrews 7:18: “On the one hand, a former commandment is annulled because of its weakness and uselessness…”;
Hebrews 10:9: “Then he says, ‘Behold, I come to do your will.’ He takes away the first [covenant] to establish the second [covenant]…”;
2 Corinthians 3:14: “For to this day when they [the Jews] read the Old Covenant, that same veil remains unlifted, because only through Christ is it taken away”;
Hebrews 8:7: “For if there had been nothing wrong with that first covenant, no place would have been sought for another”;
Colossians 2:14: “Having canceled the written code, with its decrees, that was against us and stood opposed to us; He took it away nailing it to the cross”;
Pope Pius XII, Mystici Corporis, para. 29: “…the New Testament took the place of the Old Law which had been abolished…but on the gibbet of His death Jesus made void the Law with its decrees fastened the handwriting of the Old Testament to the Cross”;
The Catechism of the Council of Trent: “…the people, aware of the abrogation of the Mosaic Law…”;
Council of Florence: “that the matter pertaining to the law of the Old Testament, of the Mosaic law…although they were suited to the divine worship at that time, after our Lord’s coming had been signified by them, ceased, and the sacraments of the New Testament began”;
Council of Trent: “but not even the Jews by the very letter of the law of Moses were able to be liberated or to rise therefrom”;
Cardinal Ratzinger: “Thus the Sinai [Mosaic] Covenant is indeed superseded” (Many Religions – One Covenant, p. 70).
St. John Chrysostom: “Yet surely Paul’s object everywhere is to annul this Law….And with much reason; for it was through a fear and a horror of this that the Jews obstinately opposed grace” (Homily on Romans, 6:12); “And so while no one annuls a man’s covenant, the covenant of God after four hundred and thirty years is annulled; for if not that covenant but another instead of it bestows what is promised, then is it set aside, which is most unreasonable” (Homily on Galatians, Ch 3);
St. Augustine: “Instead of the grace of the law which has passed away, we have received the grace of the gospel which is abiding; and instead of the shadows and types of the old dispensation, the truth has come by Jesus Christ. Jeremiah also prophesied thus in God’s name: ‘Behold, the days come, says the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah…’ Observe what the prophet says, not to Gentiles, who had not been partakers in any former covenant, but to the Jewish nation. He who has given them the law by Moses, promises in place of it the New Covenant of the gospel, that they might no longer live in the oldness of the letter, but in the newness of the spirit” (Letters, 74, 4);
Justin Martyr: Now, law placed against law has abrogated that which is before it, and a covenant which comes after in like manner has put an end to the previous one; and an eternal and final law – namely, Christ – has been given to us, and the covenant is trustworthy…Have you not read…by Jeremiah, concerning this same new covenant, He thus speaks: ‘Behold, the days come,’ says the Lord, ‘that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah…’” (Dialogue with Trypho, Ch 11).
next let’s look at Old Testament Prophecies: these were Fulfilled in Christ, Not a future Jewish Kingdom
You assert that Ezekiel and Zechariah (with Isaiah) provide “extensive detailed descriptions” of a literal Messianic kingdom, which you say I relegate to the “Heavenly Jerusalem.” This misrepresents Catholic exegesis and the New Testament’s fulfillment of prophecy.
- Ezekiel 40–48: You likely refer to Ezekiel’s vision of a restored temple and land. In context, this was written during the Babylonian exile, promising restoration (fulfilled in Ezra 1–2). The New Testament sees the temple fulfilled in Christ (John 2:19–21: “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up”) and His Church (1 Corinthians 3:16: “You are God’s temple”). The Early Church Fathers, like Cyril of Jerusalem (Catechetical Lectures 18.27), interpreted Ezekiel spiritually, not as a future Jewish state. Your literal reading ignores Hebrews 8:13: “The old covenant is obsolete.”
- Zechariah 14: You’ve previously cited Zechariah 14:16–19 (nations worshiping in Jerusalem). This is fulfilled in Christ’s first coming—His “piercing” (Zechariah 12:10; John 19:37) and the Spirit’s outpouring (Acts 2:1–4). The “feast of tabernacles” symbolizes universal worship through the Church (Matthew 28:19). Justin Martyr (Dialogue with Trypho 113) saw Zechariah fulfilled in Christ, not a future kingdom. Your literalist expectation of a Jewish-led reign contradicts John 4:21–24: Worship is “in spirit and truth,” not tied to Jerusalem.
- Isaiah: You don’t specify passages, but dispensationalists often cite Isaiah 11:1–9 or 65:17–25 for a millennial kingdom. These depict a restored creation, fulfilled in Christ’s redemptive work (Romans 8:19–21) and consummated in the new heaven and new earth (Revelation 21:1). The Fathers, like Eusebius (Ecclesiastical History 1.2), applied Isaiah to Christ’s Church, not a Jewish state. Your literalism ignores the New Testament’s reinterpretation of prophecy.
Catholic exegesis doesn’t “spiritualize away” these texts—it sees them fulfilled in Christ’s universal kingdom (Revelation 11:15: “He shall reign forever”). Your dispensationalist framework, rooted in Darby’s 1830s innovation, imposes a reading that is foreign to the Apostles and all Christians prior to the 19th century
Next, 1 Corinthians 6:3: this is Saints Judging, Not a future Jewish Millennium Kingdom
You cite 1 Corinthians 6:3 (“We shall judge angels”) to claim believers are “jury” in a post-millennial judgment, 1,000 years after a “first resurrection.” This misreads Paul.
Paul rebukes Corinthian lawsuits, saying believers will judge the world and angels (1 Corinthians 6:2–3), implying their future authority in Christ’s kingdom. This aligns with the final judgment (Matthew 25:31–46), not a Jewish millennium. The “first resurrection” (Revelation 20:6) is spiritual—baptism into Christ’s life (Romans 6:4)—and the “judgment seat of Christ” (2 Corinthians 5:10) is for all believers at His return, not a separate event. The Fathers, like Chrysostom (Homilies on 1 Corinthians 15), saw this as eschatological, not millennial.
You separate the “judgment seat” (for believers’ rewards) from the Great White Throne, placing them 1,000 years apart. Scripture doesn’t support this—2 Corinthians 5:10 applies to “all,” and Revelation 20:11–15 includes all the dead. Your dispensationalist timeline splits one judgment into two, adding complexity absent from Paul’s teaching.
Passover was April 12 this year
.....
No, it wasn’t. That was the 13th Day. The Last Supper commemoration.
Where’d you get your info?
The Antichrist Pope Gregory calendar tell you that?
/s
Cronos, you aren’t going to buy this but,
The Messiah of Israel:
Was born on an appointment He taught Israel
Was circumcised on an appointment He taught Israel
Was presented in the temple on an appointment He taught Israel
Died on an appointment He taught Israel
Rested in the tomb on an appointment He taught Israel
Resurrected on an appointment He taught Israel
Gave the gift of the Holy Spirit to His Called out assembly on an appointment He taught Israel
The Word really did become Flesh and Dwelt among us.
Judaism and Islam reject the Passover Lamb, the Word Made Flesh, yet happily follow the false goddess frigg day version of events like it’s the gospel truth.
Somehow the Roman Catechism and calendar becoming flesh appeals to the world..
And if we weren’t supposed to be on the lookout about something out of the 4th Beast that would think to change times and laws, we’d be allowed to stay ignorant..
Tick tock
Your argument is rooted in dispensationalism, a modern heresy that fractures Scripture and undermines Christ’s Church.
Dispensationalism, born with Darby, is absent from the early Church. Papias’ chiliasm (Fragments 3–4) was a minority view, rejected by Augustine and Ephesus (431 AD). Your claim that Revelation’s “thousand” must be literal to avoid “nonsense” elsewhere is baseless—context determines meaning (e.g., “thousands” in Revelation 5:11 is hyperbolic). Your hermeneutic is a 19th-century novelty, not apostolic.
You call the Catholic Church “cultic” and me a “preterist cousin,” dismissing the Fathers as “non-inspired.” These are desperate slurs, not arguments.
Catholics aren’t preterists, who see most prophecies fulfilled by 70 AD. We’re amillennial, seeing Revelation 20 as the ongoing Church age (CCC 676). Your mislabeling dodges my exegesis.
You dismiss the Fathers, but they shaped the canon and doctrine. Ignatius (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 7, c. 110 AD) affirms the Eucharist, Clement (1 Clement 44, c. 96 AD) apostolic succession. Their witness, while not Scripture, reflects the apostolic faith you claim to uphold. Rejecting them as “non-inspired” ignores their role in preserving the Bible you read.
Let’s summarize what I wrote
1. Revelation and the “1,000 Years”: You cite Revelation 20:2-6 as evidence for a literal Jewish millennium, but this interpretation is neither apostolic nor consistent with the broader New Testament. Revelation is apocalyptic literature, rich in symbolism, not a blueprint for a geopolitical kingdom. The “1,000 years” symbolizes the present Church age, where Christ reigns through His Church (Matt. 16:18-19; Eph. 1:22-23). The “first resurrection” is the spiritual rebirth of baptism (Rom. 6:4; Col. 2:12), and the binding of Satan reflects Christ’s victory over evil (Matt. 12:29; Heb. 2:14). Your literal reading ignores the genre and context, as well as the absence of any explicit “Jewish” focus in Revelation’s millennium.
2. Old Testament Prophecies (Ezekiel, Zechariah, Isaiah): You claim these texts predict a literal earthly kingdom, but the New Testament consistently interprets such prophecies as fulfilled in Christ and His Church. Ezekiel’s temple (Ezek. 40-48) is not a future blueprint but a typological vision of the new covenant, realized in Christ’s body (John 2:19-21; 1 Cor. 3:16). Zechariah 14:16-19, which you quote, speaks of universal worship, fulfilled in the Church’s Eucharist, where all nations are gathered to worship the true King (Heb. 12:22-24; Rev. 5:9-10). Isaiah’s promises of peace (Isa. 11:6-9) are realized in the reconciliation brought by Christ (Eph. 2:14-16). To demand a literal Jewish kingdom is to reject the fulfillment of these prophecies in the New Covenant (Jer. 31:31-34; Heb. 8:13).
3. Apostolic Teaching: You challenge me to find apostolic support, yet your cited verses (Rev. 2:26-27; Acts 2:34-36; 1 Cor. 15:24-28) do not teach a future Jewish millennium. Revelation 2:26-27 echoes Psalm 2, which Acts 4:25-26 applies to Christ’s current reign, not a future earthly rule. Acts 2:34-36 confirms Christ’s present exaltation at God’s right hand, ruling now (Eph. 1:20-21). 1 Corinthians 15:24-28 speaks of Christ’s ultimate victory at the end of time, not a 1,000-year interregnum. Where is the apostolic teaching for a restored Jewish theocracy? You provide none, because it does not exist. The apostles preached Christ’s kingdom as present and spiritual (Luke 17:20-21; Col. 1:13).
4. Dispensationalism’s Novelty: Your accusation that I “spiritualize” Scripture mirrors the dispensationalist error of dividing God’s plan into ethnic compartments, a notion foreign to the apostles. Dispensationalism, birthed in the 19th century through John Nelson Darby, lacks any patristic or apostolic pedigree. The early Church, from Justin Martyr to Augustine, understood the millennium in a spiritual sense, not as a Jewish kingdom. Your framework fractures the unity of God’s people, contrary to Paul’s teaching that there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile in Christ (Gal. 3:28; Rom. 10:12).
5. Your Ad Hominem and Misrepresentation: Your dismissive tone and accusation that I’m bound to a “cultic” church are unbecoming and evade substantive engagement. The Catholic Church, founded by Christ (Matt. 16:18), has preserved apostolic tradition for two millennia, unlike dispensationalism’s recent innovations. My rejection of your view is not blindness but fidelity to Scripture as interpreted by the Church, the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim. 3:15).
Net-net, Yiu have failed to provide a single apostolic verse explicitly teaching a future Jewish millennium. Revelation’s symbolic language, detached from dispensationalist presuppositions, aligns with the Church’s amillennial view. If you insist on a literal kingdom, show me where Peter, Paul, or any apostle teaches a restored Jewish theocracy post-Christ’s return. Without such evidence, your position remains a 19th-century fable, not apostolic truth.
Your response, steeped in dispensationalist fervor and a curious blend of numerology and anti-Catholic rhetoric, is borderline cuckoo, but let’s demolish it.
— The Date of Passover and the Gregorian Calendar
You assert that Passover was not on April 12, 2025, but rather tied to the “13th Day” and the Last Supper, while dismissing the Gregorian calendar as the “Antichrist Pope Gregory” calendar. Let’s clarify how wrong you are.
The Jewish calendar, which determines Passover, is lunisolar, based on both lunar and solar cycles. In 2025, Passover (Nisan 14-15) falls around April 12-13, as calculated by Jewish authorities, not by any papal decree.
The Gregorian calendar, introduced by Pope Gregory XIII in 1582, was a scientific reform to correct the Julian calendar’s drift (about 11 minutes per year), which had misaligned the date of Easter and other feasts. The reform was based on the work of astronomers like Christopher Clavius, ensuring the vernal equinox remained near March 21, as established at the Council of Nicaea (325 AD). This was not a conspiracy but a correction to align the calendar with God’s created order (Gen. 1:14).
Your sarcasm about the “Antichrist Pope Gregory” betrays a misunderstanding.
The calendar is a human tool, not divine revelation.
The Church has authority to regulate liturgical time (Matt. 16:19), and Gregory’s reform was a prudent act of stewardship, not a demonic plot. To suggest otherwise echoes the anti-Catholic tropes of 19th-century Dispensationalist polemics, not the testimony of Scripture or reason.
2. The Messiah and God’s Appointed Times
You rightly note that Christ’s life aligned with God’s appointed feasts, as outlined in Leviticus 23. As Catholics, we affirm this wholeheartedly. Jesus, the Word made flesh (John 1:14), is the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets (Matt. 5:17). Let’s examine your claims about His life events:
Born on an appointment: Tradition suggests Christ was born around the Feast of Tabernacles (Sukkot), symbolizing God “tabernacling” among us. The Church celebrates this at Christmas, fixed on December 25 not for pagan reasons but based on early Christian calculations tying the Annunciation (March 25) to the Incarnation.
Circumcised on an appointment: Christ was circumcised on the eighth day (Luke 2:21), in accord with the Law (Gen. 17:12).
Presented in the temple: This occurred 40 days after His birth (Luke 2:22-24), aligning with the Law’s requirements for purification (Lev. 12).
Died on an appointment: Christ, our Passover Lamb (1 Cor. 5:7), died on Passover, as all four Gospels attest (John 19:14; Matt. 27:45-50).
Rested in the tomb: He rested on the Sabbath, fulfilling the Feast of Unleavened Bread.
Resurrected on an appointment: He rose on the “first fruits” of the harvest (1 Cor. 15:20), celebrated as Easter.
Gave the Holy Spirit: The Spirit descended at Pentecost (Acts 2), fulfilling the Feast of Weeks (Shavuot).
Far from rejecting these truths, the Catholic Church has preserved and proclaimed them for 2,000 years. The liturgical calendar—whether Julian, Gregorian, or otherwise—exists to honor these divine appointments, not obscure them. Your claim that Catholicism rejects the “Passover Lamb” is baseless. The Mass is the re-presentation of Christ’s Passover sacrifice (Luke 22:19-20), where we partake of the Lamb’s Body and Blood (John 6:53-56). To accuse the Church of following a “false goddess Frigg” is not only historically inaccurate (Friday’s etymology is linguistic, not liturgical) but a slander against the Bride of Christ (Eph. 5:25-27).
3. Judaism, Islam, and the “Roman Catechism”
Your assertion that Judaism and Islam “reject the Passover Lamb” while following a “Frigg day version of events” is a confused caricature. Judaism reveres the Passover as a central feast, commemorating the Exodus (Ex. 12). Islam, while not observing Passover, holds Jesus as a prophet, though it denies His divinity. Neither faith is tethered to a “Frigg day” or Roman calendar. Your polemic seems to conflate all non-dispensationalist traditions with paganism, a tactic that obscures rather than illuminates.
As for the “Roman Catechism,” the Catholic Church’s teachings are not rooted in Roman imperialism but in the apostolic deposit of faith (2 Thess. 2:15). The Catechism of the Catholic Church (1992) articulates the same truths taught by the early Church Fathers, who were martyred for confessing Christ as the Passover Lamb. To claim the Church’s teachings “appeal to the world” contradicts history: the Church has been persecuted by worldly powers, from Nero to modernity, precisely for her fidelity to Christ (John 15:18-20).
4. The “Fourth Beast” and Changing Times and Laws
You allude to Daniel 7:25, where the “fourth beast” is said to “think to change times and laws.” Dispensationalists often apply this to the Catholic Church, accusing it of altering God’s calendar or commandments. This interpretation is a misreading of both Scripture and history.
.
In Daniel’s vision, the fourth beast is typically understood as the Roman Empire, with its “little horn” symbolizing a future blasphemous ruler, often identified as the Antichrist. The Church Fathers, including St. Irenaeus and St. Hippolytus, saw this as a political, not ecclesiastical, figure. To cast the Catholic Church as this beast is to ignore its role as the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim. 3:15), established by Christ to bind and loose (Matt. 18:18).
The Church has not “changed” God’s laws but fulfilled them in Christ. For example, the shift from Sabbath to Sunday worship reflects the Resurrection (Acts 20:7; Rev. 1:10), not a rejection of God’s command but its transformation in the New Covenant. The Gregorian calendar, as noted, was a technical adjustment, not a theological one. Your “tick tock” warning, while dramatic, misapplies Daniel’s prophecy to the very Church that has preserved the Scriptures you cite.
No anger, just sorrow at seeing you and others fall for the 19th century Satanic false prophet Ellen G White and her false non Christian philosophy of Seventh Day Adventism.
My goal is not to argue in anger but to point you toward the fullness of truth in Christ’s Church, using Scripture:
Mark 2:27-28 and the Sabbath
You cite Mark 2:27—“The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath”—to argue that the Sabbath is for all mankind, not just Jews, and Mark 2:28, where Jesus declares Himself “Lord of the Sabbath.” You also reference Isaiah 58:13, calling the Sabbath a “delight.” Let’s examine these verses carefully.
Mark 2:27-28: In context, Jesus defends His disciples against Pharisaic legalism for plucking grain on the Sabbath (Mark 2:23-26). He emphasizes the Sabbath’s purpose—human well-being, not rigid rule-keeping—and His authority as its Lord. While “man” (Greek: anthropos, humanity) suggests a broad intent, the Sabbath’s formal observance is rooted in the Sinai covenant, given to Israel (Exodus 20:8-11, Deuteronomy 5:15). Genesis 2:2-3 notes God’s rest, but no pre-Mosaic command mandates weekly Sabbath-keeping for all humanity. The New Testament never requires Christians to observe the seventh-day Sabbath. Instead, Colossians 2:16-17 calls Sabbaths “shadows” of Christ, and Romans 14:5-6 grants freedom in choosing worship days. Jesus’ lordship over the Sabbath (Mark 2:28) means He fulfills its purpose (Hebrews 4:9-11), not that Christians must keep Saturday
.Isaiah 58:13: This verse calls the Sabbath a “delight” in the context of Israel’s covenantal worship, urging proper observance (58:13-14). It’s Old Testament law, not a universal mandate. The New Covenant reorients worship to Christ’s resurrection, celebrated on Sunday, the Lord’s Day (Acts 20:7, 1 Corinthians 16:2). Early Christians, like Ignatius of Antioch (Letter to the Magnesians, c. 110 AD, Ch. 9), worshipped on Sunday, not Saturday, reflecting apostolic practice.
You’re correct that Scripture doesn’t call it a “Jewish Sabbath,” but Exodus 31:16-17 specifies it as a “lasting covenant” for the “Israelites.” The Sabbath’s covenantal context limits its formal observance to Israel, though its principle—rest and worship—applies universally, fulfilled in Christ (Matthew 11:28). Catholics honor this through Sunday worship (Catechism of the Catholic Church [CCC] 2174-2176), guided by the Church’s authority (Matthew 16:18-19).
Your interpretation, influenced by Ellen G. White, assumes the Sabbath is eternally binding for all. But where’s the New Testament command for Christians to keep Saturday? Without it, your claim rests on Adventist philosophy, not Scripture.
You accuse me of hating Ellen G. White, Adventists, and the Sabbath, claiming my “heart of stone” lacks love and needs Jesus for salvation. I’m sorry you feel this way, as my aim isn’t hatred but truth. Let me clarify
- I have No Hatred for Adventists: I don’t hate you or Adventists as people. My strong words target Adventism’s theological errors, particularly White’s teachings, which I believe mislead sincere believers like you. Ephesians 4:15 urges us to speak “the truth in love,” and I’m trying to do that by challenging doctrines I see as unbiblical, while respecting your dignity as a person made in God’s image (Genesis 1:27).
- Ellen G. White’s Errors: My critique of White stems from her failed prophecies and contradictions, not personal animus. She predicted some 1856 conference attendees would see Christ’s return (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 1, p. 131-132), but all died—a false prophecy (Deuteronomy 18:22). Her 1844 “Shut Door” doctrine (A Word to the Little Flock, 1847, p. 14) claimed salvation closed, later retracted. Her Investigative Judgment (The Great Controversy, p. 421-422) contradicts Hebrews 9:12, denying Christ’s finished atonement (John 19:30). These errors, not hatred, drive my rejection of her authority.
- The Sabbath: I don’t hate the Sabbath; I see it fulfilled in Christ, our rest (Hebrews 4:9-11). Catholics honor God through Sunday worship, rooted in the resurrection (CCC 2174-2176), and the Eucharist, Christ’s real presence (John 6:53-56, CCC 1324-1327). My disagreement is with Adventism’s legalistic elevation of Saturday as a salvific test, unsupported by Scripture.
You cite 2 Peter 3:9—“The Lord is… not willing that any should perish but that all should come to repentance”—to urge me to let Jesus in. I deeply appreciate this call, as it reflects God’s mercy. Catholics fully embrace this, teaching salvation through repentance and faith in Christ (CCC 1446, Ephesians 2:8-9). However, I believe you’ve been misled by Adventism’s errors, and I urge you to repent of its false teachings:
Adventism’s False Gospel: White’s Investigative Judgment, claiming Christ judges believers’ works since 1844 (The Great Controversy, p. 421-422), adds works to grace, risking the error Paul condemns (Galatians 5:4). Her Sabbath-centric salvation (The Great Controversy, p. 605-612) lacks New Testament support (Colossians 2:16-17). These doctrines obscure Christ’s sufficient sacrifice.
I urgently call you to leave Seventh-day Adventism, which I believe is a deceptive sect, not Christ’s true Church. Its errors—rooted in White’s false prophecies—mislead you from the Gospel. Here’s why you should reconsider:
White’s False Prophecies: Her failed predictions (1856, 1844, 1845) violate Deuteronomy 18:22. A true prophet doesn’t mislead with unfulfilled visions. Compare her claims to Scripture alone, not Adventist defenses.
Legalism’s Burden: Adventism’s Sabbath obsession and Investigative Judgment burden you with works, not grace (Ephesians 2:8-9). Christ’s yoke is easy (Matthew 11:30), not tied to a day or prophetic math.
test White’s teachings against Scripture.
Ask:
1. Where does the New Testament mandate Saturday worship for Christians?
2. How do White’s failed prophecies (1856, 1844, 1845) align with Deuteronomy 18:22?
3. Why does Adventism add her visions to Scripture, risking Revelation 22:18-19?
Phil, Your Adventist tirade is a vile cocktail of anti-Catholic hatred, baseless conspiracies, and Ellen G. White’s demonic distortions, masquerading as biblical truth. You accuse the Catholic Church of being the Little Horn/Antichrist, claim I’m a “Jesuit-trained stooge” peddling lies about Antiochus, and spew disgusting slander about the Vatican “recruiting” homosexuals to reach “100%” gay clergy, even joking about Grindr ads. Your obsession with the Sabbath and contempt for the Church reveal a mind poisoned by Adventism’s satanic cult.
- The Little Horn/Antichrist: Antiochus
Daniel 7:25 Context: The Little Horn arises from the fourth beast (Rome), speaking against God and oppressing His people. Historical context points to figures like Antiochus IV Epiphanes (Daniel 8) or Nero, not the papacy. Daniel 7:25’s “times and laws” likely refers to Jewish festivals and laws disrupted by persecution (1 Maccabees 1:41-49), not a papal Sunday plot. No verse names the papacy as the Little Horn or Antichrist. Your claim is Adventist fiction, not biblical fact.
Antiochus in Daniel 8: I don’t “make up farcical evidence”—Daniel 8:9-14’s Little Horn, defiling the sanctuary for 2300 days, fits Antiochus’ historical actions (167-164 BC, 1 Maccabees 1:41-54, 4:52-56). The text’s timeline and context align with his Temple desecration, not a 2300-year papal conspiracy ending in 1844. Your rejection of Antiochus ignores history and Scripture for White’s lies.
Antichrist in Scripture: 1 John 2:18-22 defines “antichrist” as one who denies Christ’s incarnation, not a church. The Catholic Church confesses Jesus as God incarnate (John 1:14, CCC 461-463), while White’s claim that “Christ was not the Lord God Almighty” (SDA Bible Commentary, Vol. 5, p. 1129) flirts with heresy. Who’s the real antichrist figure here?
The shift to Sunday, the Lord’s Day, began with the apostles (Acts 20:7, 1 Corinthians 16:2), not a papal decree. Ignatius of Antioch (Letter to the Magnesians, c. 110 AD, Ch. 9) confirms early Christians worshipped on Sunday to honor Christ’s resurrection. The Church’s authority (Matthew 16:18-19) guided this, fulfilling the Sabbath’s purpose (Colossians 2:16-17, CCC 2174-2176). Your “times and laws” accusation is baseless—no verse ties Sunday to Daniel 7:25.
Your “500 years” of Catholic denial is Adventist propaganda, not history. The Reformers’ anti-papal rhetoric was contextual, not prophetic, and they rejected your Sabbath legalism. Show me one verse explicitly naming the papacy as the Little Horn. You can’t, because your theology is White’s garbage, not God’s Word.
I repeat
White’s claim that “Christ was not the Lord God Almighty” (SDA Bible Commentary, Vol. 5, p. 1129) flirts with heresy. Who’s the real antichrist figure here?
Your claim that the Vatican is “recruiting” homosexual priests to reach “100%” gay clergy, with snide Grindr ad jabs, is a disgusting lie, amplifying Frédéric Martel’s baseless 80% claim (In the Closet of the Vatican, 2019). Let’s bury this slander:
Martel’s Fraud: Martel’s 80% figure isn’t a study—it’s speculation from 1,500 interviews with unnamed sources, relying on “gaydar” and innuendo (Guardian, 2019; CNN, 2019). No data or methodology backs it. Your “100%” escalation is pure malice, not evidence. Produce a Vatican document or credible study proving this. You won’t, because it’s a lie.
If you’re hunting sin, look at your sect. Adventist pastors face misconduct allegations too (Answering Adventism, 2023). Why fixate on unproven Vatican gossip while ignoring your own house? Romans 2:1 warns, “You who pass judgment on someone else… are guilty of the same things.” Your slander exposes your hatred, not Catholic sin.
You call me a “Jesuit-trained stooge” and claim Satan uses the Catholic Church to deceive. The real satanic deception is Seventh-day Adventism, a cult built on Ellen G. White’s demonic lies. Let’s expose its evils:
White’s False Prophecies: White’s visions, revered as divine (SDA Belief #18), fail Deuteronomy 18:22:
1856 Lie: She predicted 1856 conference attendees would see Christ’s return (Testimonies for the Church, Vol. 1, p. 131-132). All died. False.
Shut Door Heresy: She claimed salvation closed in 1844 (A Word to the Little Flock, 1847, p. 14), then backtracked. This misled thousands.
1845 Failure: White foresaw Christ’s return in June 1845 (Lucinda Burdick, 1874 letter). Another bust. White’s lies, peddled as God’s voice, are satanic, enslaving you to a false gospel.
Investigative Judgment Blasphemy: Your Little Horn obsession ties to White’s 1844 Investigative Judgment, claiming Christ judges believers’ works (The Great Controversy, p. 421-422). This denies Hebrews 9:12: “He entered the Most Holy Place once for all.” White’s heresy, born to save Miller’s 1844 flop, spits on Christ’s atonement (John 19:30).
Sabbath Idolatry: Adventism’s salvific Sabbath-keeping, with a Sunday law as the mark of the beast (The Great Controversy, p. 605-612), lacks New Testament support. Colossians 2:16-17 and Romans 14:5-6 free Christians from such rituals. Your legalism is a Judaizing heresy (Galatians 5:4), worshipping a day over Christ (Ephesians 2:8-9).
Adventism is a satanic cult, chaining you to White’s lies and a works-based gospel. Your “Little Horn” and “homosexual recruitment” rants are symptoms of this poison.
You claim “God’s true saints” rejected Catholic lies during the Reformation. Many Reformers died for their faith, but they didn’t embrace your Sabbath legalism or White’s prophecies. Luther and Calvin kept Sunday worship and rejected historicist fantasies like yours. Your appeal to their legacy is a sham
Your “Jesuit dopes” slur is Adventist conspiracism, not history. Jesuit theologians like Francisco Ribera developed Futurism, but Preterism predates them (e.g., Jerome). The Church’s eschatology engages Scripture, unlike your White-worshipping dogma
Your claim that the Catholic Church is the Little Horn/Antichrist is a demonic lie, born of Ellen G. White’s false prophecies and Adventism’s cultish hatred. No verse names the papacy as the Little Horn or ties Sunday worship to Daniel 7:25. Your homosexual “recruitment” slander is baseless filth, amplifying Martel’s unproven gossip with no evidence. Adventism’s evils—White’s failed prophecies (1856, 1844, 1845), Investigative Judgment heresy, Sabbath idolatry, and anti-Catholic venom—mark it as a satanic trap, not God’s remnant.
Produce one verse naming the papacy as Antichrist or mandating Saturday worship for Christians. You can’t, because your theology is White’s garbage, not Scripture. The Catholic Church, Christ’s bride (Ephesians 5:25-27), proclaims salvation through faith, not a day. Repent of Adventism’s lies, burn White’s books, and flee to Christ’s Church.
Stay in your cult, and you risk eternal loss (Matthew 7:23).
The Jewish calendar, which determines Passover, is lunisolar, based on both lunar and solar cycles. In 2025, Passover (Nisan 14-15) falls around April 12-13, as calculated by Jewish authorities, not by any papal decree.
.....
Stopped reading right there...
Jewish authorities?
Antichrist Judaism authorities who have postponement rules for His appointments if they conflict with their Roman Beast Talmudic Antichrist Judaism holy day of Saturn Day?
That’s the standard you want to use now?
How much trust do you place in Antichrist religion that rejects the Passover Lamb?
It appears you’re entire existence is in reliance of authorities in Antichrist religions.
You counting on Antichrist Judaism to know the Truth when they are blind being led by the blind?
——>The Little Horn/Antichrist: Antiochus
There are no Jesuit lies that can explain away the fact that Daniel’s 70 week prophecy revelation by Gabriel comes out of the longer 2300 YEAR prophecy time period (distant future). Daniel didn’t understand the 2300 day/YEAR prophecy from Daniel 8. Gabriel shows up in Daniel 9, as Daniel is praying, to EXPLAIN it and help him to understand.
Dan 8:26“The vision of the evenings and mornings that has been given you is true, but seal up the vision, for it concerns the distant future.” 27I, Daniel, was worn out. I lay exhausted for several days. Then I got up and went about the king’s business. I was appalled by the vision; it was beyond understanding.
Daniel 9:20While I was speaking and praying, confessing my sin and the sin of my people Israel and making my request to the Lord my God for his holy hill— 21while I was still in prayer, Gabriel, the man I had seen in the earlier vision, came to me in swift flight about the time of the evening sacrifice. 22He instructed me and said to me, “Daniel, I have now come to give you insight and understanding. 23As soon as you began to pray, a word went out, which I have come to tell you, for you are highly esteemed. THEREFORE, CONSIDER THE WORD AND UNDERSTAND THE VISION:
The vision Gabriel is referring to is the 2300 day/year vision. None of your Jesuit linguistic trickery can explain that truth away. Daniel’s 70 weeks is 490 literal years. Since that is the case, the 2300 days MUST BE YEARS AS WELL.
Therefore, Antiochus cannot be the Little Horn.
The Catholic Church is the whore of Babylon, Little Horn, Antichrist power, Son of Perdition, Man of Sin, and the first beast of Revelation 13. Every Protestant Reformer knew it, from the bible, backed by history. Jesuits came up with Preterism and Futurism to deflect these true Reformation accusations.
Post her complete quote, Jesuit.
Matt. 15:9 And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.’ ”
Where is the Command to worship God on Sunday??? I can show one for the Sabbath (which was made for man(kind).
And quit with the deflection on Ellen White. I don't quote her or reference her. You have an obsession with her.
Why is it so hard to simply accept,
And I saw an angel come down from heaven, having the key of the bottomless pit and a great chain in his hand. And he laid hold on the dragon, that old serpent, which is the Devil, and Satan, and bound him a thousand years, And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them: and I saw the souls of them that were beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark upon their foreheads, or in their hands; and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.
But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years. And when the thousand years are expired, Satan shall be loosed out of his prison, And shall go out to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together to battle: the number of whom is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and compassed the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city: and fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them.
And the devil that deceived them was cast into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are, and shall be tormented day and night for ever and ever. (Revelation 20:1-10))?
Revelation is apocalyptic literature,...The “thousand years” (Revelation 20:4–6) is not a literal timeline
Again, like as with preterists. regardless of differing rationalizations, the rational that since Revelation contains symbolic language then descriptive texts as this, complemented by others, can be relegated as being symbolic is perverse. . For one, you can only imagine that the devil has been bound as described, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled.
he shall rule them with a rod of iron” (cf. Psalm 2:8–9). This refers to .. “nations” are subject to Christ’s spiritual reign through the Church’s mission
Likewise. Instead, Rome has become as the gates of Hell for multitudes.
cited Zechariah 14:16–19 (nations worshiping in Jerusalem). This is fulfilled in Christ’s first coming
Which extensive detailed prophecies you can only imagine are symbolic. This is not the nature of such, and which not evidenced as fulfilled.
Ezekiel’s vision of a restored temple and land. In context, this was written during the Babylonian exile, promising restoration (fulfilled in Ezra 1–2). 2 Corinthians 5:10 applies to “all,
Which again, attests to your liberal revisionism, the discredited JEDP theory, and by relegating numerous historical accounts in the Bible to being fables or folk tales, among other denials, along with other problems which even some Catholics complain about.
You call the Catholic Church “cultic” and me a “preterist cousin,” dismissing the Fathers as “non-inspired.” These are desperate slurs, not arguments.
No, as with the Lord's denunciations, these are warranted reproofs. You, if a faithful RC, have no choice but to force Scripture to support RC teaching. That is cultic. And preterists are your cousins in relegating texts as Rv. 20 to being symbolic, regardless of differing on how it is fulfilled, and with differing interpretations in that camp.
And indeed the writings of the so-called "church fathers" are not inspired, and the truthfulness of such are as judged by Rome, whose own promulgation under the premise of self-proclaimed ensured veracity (at least in salvific matters) is not held as being God-inspired as Scripture is.
And that you would post so profusely attacking the 1,000 reign of Christ in response to my brief paragraph which related the RCC's view of the place of the Jews to its documented reluctance to recognize the state of Israel, even though this is not essential to salvation, testifies to cultic devotion.
Meanwhile, it remains that distinctive Catholic teachings are not manifest in the only wholly God-inspired, substantive, authoritative record of what the NT church believed the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (which is Scripture, and with Acts through Revelation especially revealing how the NT church understood the gospels). Including her false gospel.
Which is why I have not posted much on prophecy, as one can have differing interpretations on that issue. And certainly not now in the midst of summer. Go search previous responses by me to you* That said, any further attempts by you to reject that literal 1,000 year reign of the Lord Jesus warrant being ignored.
And a quick look at the thread shows it has been hijacked by another cultic clan.
*
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2956727/posts?page=71#71
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2956727/posts?page=72#72
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2956727/posts?page=94#94
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2964191/posts?page=304#304
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2964191/posts?page=305#305
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2964191/posts?page=388#388
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2964191/posts?page=390#390
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2964191/posts?page=399#399
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2977809/posts?page=13#13
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2978293/posts?page=94#94
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3642361/posts?page=76#76
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3642361/posts?page=93#93
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3657720/posts?page=22#22
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3703140/posts?page=262#262
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3722704/posts?page=25#25
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3766064/posts?page=44#44
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3807967/posts?page=23#23
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3778446/posts?page=31#31
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3774892/posts?page=133#133
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3766064/posts?page=270#270
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3766064/posts?page=226#226
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3766064/posts?page=224#224
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3766064/posts?page=166#166
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3766064/posts?page=70#70
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3766064/posts?page=56#56
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3722704/posts?page=55#55
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3722704/posts?page=52#52
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3722704/posts?page=25#25
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3703140/posts?page=419#419
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3703140/posts?page=444#444
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3703140/posts?page=446#446
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3703140/posts?page=447#447
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3703140/posts?page=448#448
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3857977/posts?page=45#45
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4065274/posts?page=6#6
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4048660/posts?page=83#83
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4048660/posts?page=84#84
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4048660/posts?page=63#63
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4022542/posts?page=45#45
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4022542/posts?page=46#46
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4022542/posts?page=48#48
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3998425/posts?page=2#2
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3987872/posts?page=9#9
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3982118/posts?page=292#292
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3979325/posts?page=45#45
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3898110/posts?page=81#81
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3890052/posts?page=31#31
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3885281/posts?page=30#30
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3884071/posts?page=12#12
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3819041/posts?page=349#349
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3819041/posts?page=347#347
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3878575/posts?page=13#13
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3861195/posts?page=6#6
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3813139/posts?page=153#153
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3857977/posts?page=160#160
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3857977/posts?page=162#162
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3857977/posts?page=76#76
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3857977/posts?page=44#44
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/3857977/posts?page=45#45
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4065274/posts?page=6#6
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4126425/posts?page=32#32
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4222270/posts?page=18#18
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4181595/posts?page=440#440
https://freerepublic.com/focus/religion/4126425/posts?page=32#32
Oh noes!! Not the Amish again.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.