Last Judgement #28 [Invitation to the New Church]

e-mail ^ | 1758 | Emmanuel Swedenborg

[DaveMSmith]

Last Judgment 28

V. THE LAST JUDGMENT IS TO BE WHERE ALL ARE TOGETHER, AND SO IN THE SPIRITUAL WORLD, NOT ON EARTH

The general belief about the Last Judgment is that the Lord accompanied by angels will appear in glory in the clouds of heaven, and He will then raise up from their graves all who have ever lived from the beginning of creation, clothe their souls with a body, and, when they have been summoned to meet, judge them, sending those who have lived good lives to everlasting life or heaven, and those who lived wicked lives to everlasting death or hell.

The churches have taken this belief from the literal sense of the Word, and there was no possibility of removing it so long as it remained unknown that everything mentioned in the Word has a spiritual sense; and this sense is the real Word, the literal sense serving as its basis or foundation. Without this kind of literal sense the Word could not have been Divine, and have served both heaven and the world as a means of instruction on how to live and what to believe, and as a means of conjunction. So if anyone knows the spiritual things corresponding to natural things in the Word, he can know that the Lord's coming in the clouds of heaven does not mean His appearance there, but His appearance in the Word. The Lord is the Word, because He is Divine truth. The clouds of heaven in which He is to come are the literal sense of the Word, and the glory is its spiritual sense. The angels are heaven, from which He appears, and they are also the Lord as regards Divine truths.# This makes plain the meaning of these words, namely, that when the church comes to an end the Lord will open up the spiritual sense of the Word, and thus reveal Divine truth such as it is in itself. This will be a sign that the Last Judgment is at hand.

That there is a spiritual sense within each thing and expression in the Word, and what it is may be seen in the Arcana Coelestia. This book expounds in full detail the contents of Genesis and Exodus in accordance with their spiritual sense. Some selected passages dealing with the Word and its spiritual sense may be found in the small work About the White Horse described in Revelation.

# The Lord is the Word, because He is Divine truth in heaven (AC 2533, 2813, 2859, 2894, 3397, 3712). The Lord is the Word because the Word comes from Him and is about Him (AC 2859). It is about nothing but the Lord, especially in its inmost sense about the glorification of His Humanity, so that the Lord Himself is contained in it (AC 1873, 9357). The Lord's coming is His presence in the Word and the revelation of this (AC 3900, 4060). A cloud in the Word means the letter of the Word, or its literal meaning (AC 4060, 4391, 5922, 6343, 6752, 8106, 8781, 9430, 10551, 10574). Glory in the Word means Divine truth such as it is in heaven and in the spiritual sense (AC 4809, 5922, 8267, 8427, 9429, 10574). Angels in the Word mean Divine truths coming from the Lord, since angels are the means by which they are received, and they do not utter them of themselves but from the Lord (AC 1925, 2821, 3039, 4085, 4295, 4402, 6280, 8192, 8301). The trumpets and horns then blown by angels mean Divine truths in heaven and revealed from heaven (AC 8815, 8823, 8915).

[MarkBsnr]

Ahem. Latin is a liturgical language. Ahem.

[Dr. Eckleburg]

Truth is Roman Catholics have changed the interpretation of the atonement, of faith, of grace, of judgment, and just about every other major doctrine. There really isn't anything left of Christianity in Roman Catholicism except funny hats and lots of pomp. And those weren't Christian either.

AMEN! Most egregiously, Rome has twisted and nullified the true meaning of justification, the core of our Christian faith -- that Christ's death satisfied in full the wages due God for our sins.

Once Rome rid itself of the Scriptural doctrine of justification by the active faith of Jesus Christ alone, it became a pagan temple to a man-made god.

Roman Catholics pretend to base doctrine upon "improving" on the interpretation of the fathers, yet they distort and depart from the original interpretation. They have followed the heresy of Pelagius which the early church rightfully condemn yet claim they trace their roots back to Augustine. They worship (venerate) the creature rather than the creator. They've changed the First Commandment in their text simply to avoid embarrassment at breaking it.

It would almost be laughable if it wasn't such a pity. Yet we are reminded of the billions of Catholics around the world who interject pagan rituals into mass. And we are led to believe this is OK.

AMEN, Harley!

No wonder FRoman Catholics want to shut down the Religion Forum. This place has been a blessing to all those seeking to understand the errors of Rome and just how far that religion has strayed from historic, orthodox Christianity.

"Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears;

And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." -- 2 Timothy 4:2-4

[aruanan]

Thanks for the link. I recommend that you also consider what Jewish Encyclopedia, and other Jewish sources have to say about Paul and his Judaism.

It's not surprising and sort of funny that post-first century Judaism has so largely defined itself in a reactionary sort of way with respect to Christianity. It's even more different from first century Judaism (in its many varieties) than the first century Jews who believed in Jesus as Messiah were.

[metmom]

2 Corinthians 2:15-16

15For we are the aroma of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing, 16 to one a fragrance from death to death, to the other a fragrance from life to life. Who is sufficient for these things?

[Dr. Eckleburg]

8~)

[Kolokotronis]

"Ahem. Latin is a liturgical language. Ahem."

Well, second tier but OK:

"Sanctissimae Matris Dei, salva nos!"

Happy now?

[Natural Law]

"AMEN! Most egregiously, Rome has twisted and nullified the true meaning of justification, the core of our Christian faith -- that Christ's death satisfied in full the wages due God for our sins."

Is this just your ill informed opinion or is this based upon an infallible interpretation? If it is an infallible interpretation, who interpreted infallibly, you?

Exactly when did the Nicene Creed cease being the core of Christian faith, 1560?

[Quix]

HEY! Been missing seeing you around.

[RnMomof7]

Amen

[HarleyD]

Which Scripture was declared inerrant and in what language?

I believe Jerome put that together if I'm not mistaken.

And what makes you think that you have that interpretation correct?

I wasn't the one who believed you could pay money to get your love ones out of purgatory, now was I? What makes you think the Cardinals got it right?

You guys were willing to let the Muslims take Europe as long as they'd let you have some small territory of your own. It was the Catholics that stopped the Muslims in Austria

Please let me know when you plan on making your trip to retake the Holy Lands. OOPS-I forgot that the Pope "kissed" and made up. It kind of makes you wonder which Pope was the "infallible" sort, doesn't it?

All the way back to the beginning, the Catholic Church is the original Christians and, given what we see posted here day after day, the only Christians.

I'd suggest a review of the seven churches of Revelations. If they were all under one roof of the Catholic Church, God did not have very nice things to say about them.

[Quix]

WELL PUT.

INDEED.

[HarleyD]

Actually, we stick to the same beleifs as the Early Christians, the New Testament Church by our belief in Baptism for the remission of sins and belief in the presence of Christ in the Eucharist.

Actually, the Church has changed it's doctrine on the atonement. All one has to do is look up "Atonement" on New Advent (the Catholic encyclopedia) and it will even tell you the view has changed. Catholics no long believe Christ was a sacrifice to a wrathful God. This is old school. Rather Catholics believe Christ set an example. Very Orthodox in view but never what the western fathers taught.

You'll also find that Augustine wrote about the confusion of the purpose of baptism. At first they thought that once baptized you would live a perfect life. When that didn't work then they taught when you were baptized it was up to you to live a perfect life. Oops, that didn't work either. Then the Church taught that you should wait until the very last possible moment and be baptist so you wouldn't sin. Trouble with this approach was that there were some baptizers who just weren't fast enough runners. Finally they looked upon baptism as an act of faith. I say all of this just to illustrate that the early fathers didn't have a handle on everything.

As far as the Eucharist goes, Christ is present wherever two or more are GATHERED in His name. Wouldn't you agree? Grace is not imparted through the Eucharist. We know we have received grace because we believe in Christ Jesus.

[HarleyD]

Remember Paul preached baptism for the remission of sins

Baptism has been and always will be subject to interpretation. I have attended a Baptist church and now am attending a Presbyterian church. Both hold differing views of baptism and, looking at the matter and scriptures objectively, neither one of them can be faulted in their interpretation.

But IF you believe your conscience is telling you to be baptized, then why not be baptized? Baptism does not save you as Peter (your first Pope) states. ONLY God's grace saves you. Baptism is only an illustration of that cleansing that only God gives. After all, Peter's writings are infallible-the only Pope to be so. ;O)

[HarleyD]

Could you tell me which version of the Luke's Gospel...do you consider "inerrant and infallible"?

Why the one in my Bible.

LOL! Kolo, do you "reject" the Nicene Creed "and the blasphemous interpretation of Mary"?

When have the Orthodox accepted the filique of the Nicene Creed? When have the Orthodox accepted Mary as Co-Redepdix?

How many corrupt, homosexual, Jim Joneses, money manipulating, prostitute chasing, end of the world nuts do you have in the Protestant community to pretend to have the moral high ground form which to throw mud at others?

Um...not many. Most of them end up joining the Catholic Church.

They did to an extent, and the Protestants followed right along, and changed it one more time, so they are twice removed.

Well, there are many Protestants today who no longer follow the Reformed teaching, so I certainly can't fault that statement. They're nothing more than Catholic Lite.

The "firstborn of all creation"? Well, worship and venerate is not one and the same. Kolo and others who understand koine Greek have told you that on numerous occasions

I've been to the Holy Lands and seen how the Jews cringe whenever they past Orthodox and Catholic churches. You see, they seem to think there is a lot of idolatry in them. So while the Orthodox and Catholics may wish to go to great gyrations and SAY they are not REALLY bowing down to idols, that is not how others preceive it.

Protestants are a lot more liberal and all-inclusive then Catholics or especially the Orthodox. Protestant "churches" have openly homosexual "married" men and openly lesbian and "married" women as "bishops", or "ordained" ministers.

I don't know if I agree with this statement. I think this can be said for all churches. To their credit the Orthodox seem to draw the line.

[HarleyD]

I do have a reputation to maintain and I hate to be accuse of saying the most egregious thing on FR. While the Orthodox accept the Nicene Creed in what they consider the "early form", they reject what they consider the "later text".

It was only a few years after this very Council of 431 AD, that some in the western Church began to insert an extra word into the Creed. In the Latin version of the Creed, the word - ‘filioque’ (‘and from the Son’) was added in the statement concerning the nature of the Holy Spirit. This small word had large consequences; it became the cause of much theological disagreement and was a major factor in the eventual separation of the Roman Church from the Orthodox in 1054 AD.

To say the Holy Spirit proceeds ‘from the Father and the Son’, is to attempt to change the very nature of God as he has revealed himself - the Orthodox belief that God is ‘three persons’ and yet ‘one God’. The addition of the ‘filioque’ is to confuse and turn upside down this revelation. This is not just an argument about words, of semantics; it comes to the very heart of who God is. It is this fundamental Christian truth that the Creed was promulgated to protect!

To this day, the Orthodox Church stands firm on the use of the Creed in its original form as declared at the first three Ecumenical Councils of the undivided Church. It is interesting that some Protestant Churches have, in more recent times, expressed the Creed in its original form (without the filioque) as an alternative or ‘preferred’ form. The debate still rages between the Roman and Orthodox Churches concerning the ‘filioque’. It was this inclusion into the Creed that had so much bearing upon the eventual separation of the Roman Church 1054 AD, and, sadly, it is its continual use that proves to be such a major obstacle in any talks of reunion.”

Greek Orthodox on the Nicene Creed

[Natural Law]

As I admonished you in an earlier post you need to actually learn the real doctrines of the Church before you can criticize it. You really, really look foolish ranting about nonexistent doctrines.

"I wasn't the one who believed you could pay money to get your love ones out of purgatory.

There are numerous calls for alms giving in Scripture. The myth is that the Catholic Church has never claimed to know anything about how long or short anyone's time in purgatory is in general, much less in a specific person’s case.

"It kind of makes you wonder which Pope was the "infallible" sort, doesn't it?"

Again, as I posted earlier, there have only been two instances of a Pope speaking infallibly. In neither instance did it have anything to do with protecting pilgrims to the Holy Land.

"I'd suggest a review of the seven churches of Revelations."

Since you have not denied that you have the gift of infallible interpretation of Scripture perhaps you could share with us who exactly are the seven churches in revelation.

Hey, Alex! Here is another opportunity for you to prance and gloat over the zotting of Bronx2. Harley screwed up and pinged him.

[Natural Law]

"Baptism has been and always will be subject to MISinterpretation.

There fixed it for you. Since you can infallibly interpret Scripture why don't you settle the matter once and for all and give us the real true interpretation and identify, along with Catholicism, which of the Protestant denominations are defective.

[Kolokotronis]

"While the Orthodox accept the Nicene Creed in what they consider the "early form", they reject what they consider the "later text"."

Not what we "consider" the "early form", it is actually the original Nicene Creed as adopted by the Councils. That's just a fact, Harley. What the Latin Church and virtually all Protestants say, because you got it from the Latin Church, is a later version designed to address Arianism. For centuries it was condemned but eventually the Franks forced its acceptance on the Western Church. The Pope today, of course, uses the original form when praying with Orthodox hierarchs and people. As I understand it, the original Greek form is also used by the Latin Church for catechesis.

[Alex Murphy]

Hey, Alex! Here is another opportunity for you to prance and gloat over the zotting of Bronx2. Harley screwed up and pinged him.

[Natural Law]