After paganism in Rome, an new era began. From then (300 AD roughly) to today, a span of 1700 years, several major religious conditions have arisen that have varying views about how to interpret the meaning of this history.
And the only views of that history that are fully consistent are Catholicism and the total apostates (atheists and relativists). Catholicism is consistent in the sense that, from the beginning, the fullness of truth existed, and various shots were taken at its differing sources, so that, beginning with Orthodoxy, less and less was gradually belieived until nothing at all was accepted (the modern secular apostasy). Derivatively, the secular apostates are on the opposite pole, but consistent: total BS started in the beginning (Roman Catholicism), and little by little, humanity began to wake up from its religious ignorance to discover that any talk of God and religion is BS.
IOW, for the Catholicism, the sun is gradually setting, for apostates, the sun is gradually rising.
But for intermediate religions, this is not so. They are all INconsistent, in the sense that, at some point prior to their “salvific stage”, TOO MUCH was believed (ie., by RCC), then, in their “salvifici stage”, JUST ENOUGH was believed, then, at some point afterward, TOO LITTLE was believed.
Just follow the list: Islam says Rome believes TOO MUCH (God is NOT Trinitian, He is Unitarian, and Christ is NOT Messiah.) But the Islamics would say the Enlightenment is TOO LITTLE, seeing as it denies DIvine Intervention and Revelation.
The Schismatics claim RCC believes TOO MUCH (Peter is not supreme He is one of equals), but Protestantism is TOO LITTLE (Protestants don’t accept Oral Tradition and formal Apostolic Succession in Bishops and Seven Sacraments, they only accept the Written Word.)
The heretics (Protestants) say Rome believes TOO MUCH (those that claim to be successors of the Apostles are not, there is no Oral Tradition, only the Written [Scripture]), but the Enlightenment is TOO LITTLE (Deists deny Divine Intervention and Rationalists deny Divine Revelation, hence they attack the Scriptures and Christ.)
And Finally, the children of the Enlightenment still have the minimal light: for them, all stages prior to them are TOO MUCH (there is no Triune nature to God, there is no Pope or Bishops, nor Scriptures, that is, there is NO Divine Revelation or Intervention) but the secular apostasy is TOO LITTLE, seeing as atheists do not live according to reason (the existence of a Supreme Being, which we can call God, is evident from reason, without Revelation), and the relativists are against reason and the moral law (Deists and Rationalists still acknowledge absolute truth, and the natural moral law that is evident from reason, hence, they don’t have much problem with the Ten Commandments, because they are naturally ethical).
Only Catholicism retains the totality of sources, and says that ALL others don’t believe ENOUGH (the Trinity and Incarnation, the supremacy of the Petrine Office, the general collection of Bishops and Oral Tradition, the Written Tradition, and even the unaided human intellect, Reason.) Only the full apostates, fully deny all these sources in terms of religion.
All others are Inconsistent (first too much, then just right, then too little.)
Why is that? And what would that say about the Seal and the Mark, which also seem to represent poles?
Food for thought.