Posted on 01/13/2005 8:10:49 AM PST by Rutles4Ever
(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
"WRONG! The following quote clearly indicates that the modern concept of the rapture was understood in the early church and is much much older than 175 years."
"All the saints and elect of God are gathered together before the tribulation, which is to come, and are taken to the Lord, in order that they may not see at any time the confusion which overwhelms the world because of our sins."-Pseudo-Ephraem (c. 374-627) Ancient Pretrib rapture statement " ~ DannyTN #249
Not hardly.
Pseudo-Ephraem - a deliberate coverup
Computer researchers who have clicked on the much repeated claim that Morgan Edwards (1722-1795) was a pre-tribulation rapturist probably have been unaware of the incredible cover-up of historical facts! Paul Alexander, the expert on Pseudo-Ephraem that Grant Jeffrey, Thomas Ice, and Hal Lindsey deceitfully lean on, has two summaries (textual and outline) of P-E's sequence showing that P-E saw only one (post-trib) coming following the great tribulation-------everything deliberately covered up by these (and by many other) pre-trib leaders!
Danny TN: "What's more it's clear in the scripture. I've already posted the verses that say, alive Christians will meet Jesus in the air after the dead in Christ rise. Tell me what your view makes of that statement. ...."
In the 19th and 20th centuries (as I posted previously) a certain variety of premillennialism that holds to a pretribulational coming of Christ became popular. This became known as the "pretribulation rapture" view because it holds that when Christ first returns the church will be "raptured" or snatched up into heaven to be with him. Those holding that latest pop-culture view believe that the tribulation mentioned in Matt. 24 applies to Jewish belivers during the tribulation and not to the church generally (since it was already "raptured up to heaven").
The main underlying purpose - the bottom line premise for the people who hold that view is the desire to preserve a destinction between the church (raptured to heaven) and Isreal (which they think will constitute the people of God on earth during the tribulation and then during the millennial kingdom).
Unfortunately, the New Testament does not support a distinction of this kind between Isreal and the Church. God does not have two distinct plans for two different groups of people. Nor does he stage two second comings; one before the tribulation and one after the tribulation 7 years later.
The same trumpet - the trumpet that is blown in Matt. 24:34; 1 Thess.4:16, and 1 Cor.15:51-52 is the last trumpet wherein Jesus returns the second time as he promised [John 14:3] . At that time there will be the resurrection of both believers and unbelievers, the final judgement and the new heaven and the new earth. (Revelation 20 is now being fulfilled in this, the "church age" -- an indeterminate period of time described by the figure of speech, "a thousand years" -- which will continue until Christ returns the second time where all those end-time events occur at once.)
"For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek..." [Romans 10: 12.] There is only ONE olive tree. [ Romans 11:24].
Abraham is the father of ALL the faithful.[Romans 9: 6-8].
Excellent! I have just read the passages, Judges 17 and 18, and it is as you say.
The two examples he used for "father and priest"...
The first time, the house of Micah comes to the levite, shows him the "gods" (Judges 18:24, Micah refers to the three idols as "gods") he made with the shekels of silver, and offers him a salary, room and board, and new clothes, to be his father and priest...so the Levite goes to live with him.
Then later, the Danites bust in the house, grab the three "gods", and stand out front. The Levite "Priest and Father" (!) asks them what they are doing, and they tell him to shut up and come on, 'cause they are taking the "gods", and wouldn't he rather be a "Priest and Father" for a whole city than just for this one house? The Levite is like, "sweet...I will be more popular" (that's the jive I got from the passage, anyway, says the offer made him "glad") and he runs off with the Danites and stolen "gods".
Interesting, indeed. There is a lesson to be learned here...before you quote scripture about how something is right (eg: asking someone to be your father), make sure it's something you would actually want to be associated with. I'm HOPING you wouldn't want to be associated with a story of a Levite who worships idols.
The "end time" teachings you claim to embrace teach a "secret rapture". Have you never seen the stupid bumper stickers?
You don't appear to be up to speed with Hal Lindsey, et.al., yet.
When Christ returns the second time it definately won't be any secret. The one and only time he returns for the second time - a LOUD trumpet will be blown just before all hell breaks lose. (See my previous post in response to your #249)
"I think people are going to sit up and take notice. Hopefully, if we have talked about Revelations and haven't dismissed it as irrevelant, the people remaining will recognize the rapture for what it is and seek repentance and salvation. But it doesn't look like very many will."- DannyTN
God has many people. He is able to see to it that not a single one of his elect will be lost. It doesn't depend on them in the slightest. [Romans 8:28-30; 9:11-13; Acts 13:48; Eph. 1:4-6 etc., etc.]
Not so. It fits. Maybe if you thought a little harder.
I beg the differ. You went from the term "Romanist" to anathema to the Bible Canon. No transition.
Looks as if Damasus didn't understand that there is no part of the OT which was not given by the prophets. That the apocryphal books were not written by the prophets are clear and certain. All confess that Malachi was the last Jewish prophet. Between Malachi and John the Baptist, no other Jewish prophet arose, but the writers of the apocryphal books lived after Malachi.
It is significant that the Council of Trent was the response of the Roman Catholic Church to the teachings of Martin Luther and the rapidly spreading Protestant Reformation, and the fact that the books of the Apocrypha contain support for the Roman Catholic Church's teaching of prayers for the dead and the justification by faith plus works, not by faith alone.
In spite of the fact that even Cardinal Cajetan, himself, Luther's famous opponent, rejected the canonicity of the Apocrypha, in 1546, at the time they affirmed the Apocrypha to be within the canon, the Roman Catholic Church said that they had the authority to constitute A LITERARY WORK to be "Scripture". ..." Wayne Grudem [paraphrased from Systematic Theology-Zondervan] See #246
The fact that these books were included by Jerome in his Latin Vulgate translation of the Bible (completed in A.D. 404) gave support to their inclusion, EVEN THOUGH JEROME HIMSELF SAID THEY WERE NOT "BOOKS OF THE CANON", but merely "books of the church" that were helpful and useful for believers.
The earliest Christian list of OT books that exists today is by Melito, bishop of Sardis, writing about A.D. 170. It is noteworthy that Melito names none of the books of the Apocrypha, but he includes all of our present Old Testament books except Esther.
Eusebius also quotes Origen as affirming most of the books of our present Old Testament canon (including Esther), but no book of the Apocrypha is affirmed as cononical, and the books of Maccabees are EXPLICITLY said to be "OUTSIDE OF THESE (canonical books]" ~ Ecclesiastical History 6.15.2 (Origen DIED about A.D. 254).
These books were never accepted by the Jews as Scripture.... but the use of the Apocrypha gradually increased in some parts of the church UNTIL the time of the Reformation.
Religious KOOKS would think that is a very profound statement. Ding! Ding!
I hate to break it to you, but there are no "present day" prophets.
"In many and various ways God spoke of old to our fathers by the prophets; but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son...". [Heb. 1:1-2]
God's speaking to us by his Son is the culmination of his speaking to mankind and is his greatest and final revelation to mankind.
(The exceptional greatness of the revelation that comes through the Son, far exceeds any revelation in the Old Covenant as noted over and over again in the first and second chapters of Hebrews.)
Once the writings of the New Testament apostles and their authorized companions were completed, we have everything that God wants us to know about the life, death, & resurrection of Christ, and its meaning for the lives of believers for all time.
All of the prophecies in the OT pointed to Christ. Jesus says so Himself.
“Beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he [Jesus] expounded unto them in all the Scripture the things concerning himself.” (Luke 24:24; cf. Rom. 1:2)
“All things must be fulfilled which are written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me” ~ Jesus
Then what of the inclusion of these texts in the original King James Bible?
Who is it? LOL
You need to start your "thinking" at an earlier stage in the game. [Hint: From your objection to my use of the term]
The King James Version of 1611 was never authorized and was not a true version.
It was based on Erasmus Greek Text (TR). Revised in 1629, 1638, 1653, 1701, 1762, 1769, and several more times unofficially. Over 100,000 changes were made.
It unfortunately depended to some degree on the Bishop's Bible and included some anachronistic Latinisms and other problems which eventually had to be corrected.
I find it hilarious that you would ask such a question and totally IGNORE the implications of what I wrote in my previous post.
You have shown yourself to be quite the unserious person.
I'll bail out of your boat now. I get bored riding in circles with intellectually dishonest one-armed boat rowers after a while.
Prove I am intellectually dishonest. Also, to say that I am "unserious" is hypocritical, judging from your refusal to debate further.
Let's see if you can prove it yourself. Explain in your own words what this Scripture means: John 2:27
no, you accuse me of dishonesty, and I want you to prove this claim. I will not be slandered by you without cause. The Douay-Rheim Bible and Latin Vulgate (the bible used well before the Reformation) doesn't have St. John 2:27 .
. Strange Bibles you have there.
You're anxious to prove your intellectual honesty, so let's try another Scripture. Do they have John 6:65 so that you can explain that one in your own words?
My mistake. I double checked and see that I should have rendered it: 1 John 2:27. Sorry for the mixup.
Thank you for pointing me to Christ our savior.
It is the Holy Spirit of Jesus which speaks through many today, it's not mystical or demonic. A wisper here or a word from the Bible there that jumps off the page which brings forth revelation is spoken out for His glory and for the changing of hearts.
Ephesians 4:11 says, "And He Himself gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers (12) for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ."
I will pray for an abundance of blessing for you and those you love, I thank you for caring enough to post to me. By our love they shall know us.
Bump for later.
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.