POPE: SATAN WILL BE VANQUISHED BUT THE FIGHT IS LONG AND HARD (Pope invokes the Apocalypse!)

(AGI) - Vatican City, 12 Jan - The Pope commented today on the Apocalypse before the 7,000 people attending the General Papal Audience today in the Nervi Hall, indicating that the fight between good and evil, personified by Satan, is a very hard one, as shown by the manifold violence and injustice in the world today, however the outcome is certain, evil will be vanquished. Pope John Paul II explained, "God and the Lamb, Christ, surrounded by the 'Council of the Crown', are judging human history in good and evil, but showing us however the ultimate end in salvation and glory. The songs which are found in the Apocalypse and which serve to illustrate the issue of divine glory which regulates the flux, often disconcerting, of the tide of human events". Of great significance is the first part of the hymn intoned by the 24 ancients who seem to incarnate the chosen people in their two historic stages, the twelve tribes of Israel and the twelve apostles of the Church. The Pope continued, Satan, the original adversary, who accused our brothers in the heavenly court, has now been cast down from heaven and therefore no longer has great power. He knows he has not much time left because history is about to see a radical turning point in freedom from evil and therefore he is reacting full of great fury. And then the resurrected Christ will rise up, whose blood is the principle of salvation and who received from the Father royal power over the entire universe, in Him are centred salvation, strength and the kingdom of our God. In his victory are associated the Christian martyrs who chose the path of the cross, not yielding to evil and it virulence, but delivering themselves to the Father and uniting themselves to the death of Christ by means of a testimony of donation and courage which brought them to give up life in order to die". He concluded, "the words of the Apocalypse regarding those who have vanquished Satan and evil through the blood of the Lamb, echo also in the splendid prayer attributed to the Christian martyr Simeon, from Seleucia-Ctesifonte in Persia, 'I will receive life without pain, worry, anguish, persecutor, persecuted, oppressor, oppressed, tyrant or victim, there I will see no threat of king, or terror of prefects, no-one will quote me in court or terrorise me and no-one will drag me or scare me". (AGI) . 121425 GEN 05

Cause the Pope interprets things as he sees them in his belief system which is based on the New testament

Every time some world wide situation occurs all the bible types are predicting the apocalypse

Those existing in Pauls time etc fully expected it back then
__________________________________________________________

I was looking for a post, and ran across yours. The following may be of interest to all here.

The Revelation by John told Jesus' followers that it was not the 'end of the [physical] world', but the 'end of the age', the end of the Old Covenant, the end of the world AS THEY KNEW IT. Jesus said He had made all things New. This was the New Heaven and Earth. The Jews knew 'heaven and earth' as the temple and the city, which Jesus DID COME to destroy in 70 AD. Do a search at preteristarchive.co for 'heaven and earth'. The New Heaven and Earth was the New Covenant and the New Jerusalem. See also the Jewsish Wars at preteristarchive.com. There were visible signs of His coming: a comet that hung like a sword over the city for over a year, the heavy doors of the temple swung open of themselves as voices said Let us depart from this place (the glory had left it), heavenly chariots and soldiers were seen fighting in the heavens and in the streets. [ See Hebrews 12:26 and Hebrews 8:13. ] He gave them 40 extra years 'to repent of their sin but they would not'; hence He unfortunately was forced to destroy them and their city, to make way for the new 'Heaven and Earth', the one that will never be destroyed. The Christians saw the Roman armies surrounding the city and they escaped on the eve of the destruction. They had previously sold all their earthly goods because they knew the Revelation was not for some time off in the future like Daniel's vision was, but NOW [as in right THEN]:

'....It is terribly important that the interpreter of Revelation begin at the first verses of the book and let them lead him to the proper interpretive approach. The truth of the matter is: John specifically states that the prophecies of Revelation would begin coming to pass within a very short period of time. He dogmatically states that the events of Revelation were "shortly to take place "and that "the time is near." And as if to insure that we not miss the point which many commentators have! he emphasized this truth in a variety of ways. Let us briefly note his contemporary expectation.

First, we should note that he carefully varies his manner of expression, asif to avoid any potential confusion as to his meaning. A brief survey of the three leading terms he employs will be helpful in ascertaining his meaning.

The first of these terms to appear in Revelation is the Greek word tachos, translated "shortly." John is explaining the purpo\se of his writing in Revelation 1:1, which reads: "The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must shortly [tachos] take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John." The Arndt-Gingrich Greek lexicon lists the following meanings under the tachos entry: "speed," "at once," "without delay," "soon," "in a short time," "shortly."

If you look up Revelation 1:1 in any modern translation you will find that the idea clearly exhibited is that of the very near occurrence of the events of Revelation. This term also occurs in Revelation 2:16; 3:11; and 22:6, 7, 12, 20. Even a cursory reading of these verses unavoidably leads to the conclusion that John expected these things to happen "shortly" or "soon."

Another term John uses is eggus, which means "near" (Rev. 1:3;22:10). In Revelation 1:3 we read: "Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of the prophecy, and heeds the things which are written in it; for the time is near (eggus)." When used of spatial relationships it means: "near," "close to," "close by." This term literally means "at hand." According to Arndt-Gingrich, when used of temporal relationships it signifies: "near," "soon." Its import in our context is clearly that of temporal nearness. The events bracketed by these statements were expected, by the apostle John, to begin taking place at any moment. They were near!...'

Read the rest here:

THE BEAST OF REVELATION IDENTIFIED By Kenneth L. Gentry, Jr. http://www.iei.net/~doghouse/beast_id.htm

I gather full preterists believe 'that is all she wrote', and they may be right. My little pea brain is still working through a few things such as Rev. 20:7-10 as I stated earlier.

He also called it 'juice/wine':

http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Mat/Mat026.html#26

Mat 26:29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this FRUIT OF THE VINE, until that day when I drink it new with you IN MY FATHER'S KINGDOM. http://www.blueletterbible.org/tsk_b/Mat/26/29.html Which He did!

Act 10:41 — Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God, [even] to us, who did eat and drink with him after he rose from the dead. http://www.blueletterbible.org/tsk_b/Act/10/41.html . Which means we have been living in the Kingdom of God/'millennium' [thank you whoever pointed out the misspelling of 'millennium'. I will never do THAT again!] lo, all these almost 2,000 years.

I'm not an expert on this, and although raised Lutheran, I alays had a problem with transubstantiation. It always seemed like cabbibalism to me. Furthermore, there were severe admonitions AGAINST drinking blood:

Lev 3:17 — [It shall be] a perpetual statute for your generations throughout all your dwellings, that ye eat neither fat nor blood. *** http://www.blueletterbible.org/tsk_b/Lev/3/17.html

Lev 7:26 Moreover ye shall eat no manner of blood, [whether it be] of fowl or of beast, in any of your dwellings. *** http://www.blueletterbible.org/tsk_b/Lev/7/26.html

Lev 7:27 Whatsoever soul [it be] that eateth any manner of blood, even that soul shall be cut off from his people.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Lev/Lev007.html#26
http://www.blueletterbible.org/tsk_b/Lev/7/27.html

There were LOTS of admonitions on that subject in Leviticus 17. http://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/Lev/Lev017.html#10

Futhermore, God entered into the Holy of Holies ONCE AND FOR ALL for the removal of sin. I don't believe He meant to be a sacrifice over and over. After all, did He not say, 'It is FINISHED'?

1Cr 11:25 — After the same manner also [he took] the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink [it], IN REMEMBRANCE [not SACRIFICE!] of me. http://www.blueletterbible.org/tsk_b/1Cr/11/25.html

Therefore, since God is the same yesterday, today, and forever, I'm inclined to believe the wine was SYMBOLIC of the blood. However, you might want to check out the commentaries [I like Matthew Henry and JFF&B], letter 'L', and see what they have to say. [I haven't done that.]

'TESTIMONY OF DONATION' - what does it mean? Anyone?

"how can you be guilty against the body and blood of Christ when, according to you, they are merely trifle symbols."

Please quote my post where I called them "trifle". You cannot, because I did not...

Or would you rather convert me to Catholicism by lieing and trying to make me look like I find Jesus's symbols unimportant?

Jesus VERY CLEARLY identifies the bread and wine at the first Communion as his body and blood. You accuse me of picking and choosing, but you REFUSE to acknowledge that he broke BREAD and passed it around, saying, "This bread is my body, this cup is my blood, this do in remembrance of me" Yes, I will agree that the verses you love to quote say that he gives his flesh and blood for us to partake in that we might have life forever. But you must also see that in Luke 22, he then identifies what we are to use as symbols of that flesh.

Jesus was human when he said these things. Then he had flesh to give. Now he isn't human anymore. Since he is no longer of the flesh, he has shown us how we may symbolically take communion in remembrance of Him.

You should think twice before you accuse someone of considering these symbols "trifle symbols". NOTHING about the communion is unimportant to me. Just because I choose to see BOTH accounts of the communion instead of just the one that you like to take so literally, does not make me wrong. You accuse me of only choosing what verses I want, yet you STILL have not explained to me what Jesus meant when he broke bread and gave it to his chosen apostles and told them it represented his body.

Since you were so helpful in quoting the verses you accuse me of ignoring, I will do the same for you:

Luke 22: 13-20 -
13 And they went, and found as he had said unto them: and they made ready the passover.
14 And when the hour was come, he sat down, and the twelve apostles with him.
15 And he said unto them, With desire I have desired to eat this passover with you before I suffer:
16 For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.
17 And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves:
18 For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come.
19 And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in remembrance of me.
20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

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.