Revelation of christ to john( by walt2000)
Read Revelations several times .
Read it from several interp’s of bibles, the more times the better.
,and not just catholic bibles, but prods. ,to. Well, they deserve a chance to,and we’ll give them a chance to show that the bible’ are true right across the board.this pertains to Revelations only ,no other book will be mentioned.walt2000
Just because you have spent more than 30 years focussing on only one book in the Bible (Revelations) there is no need to try to persuade other people to do that. If you want to restrict people to one or few books they should be focussing on the Gospels.
I think Walt is saying that he recommends to read protestant interpretaions of Apocalypse, but not of any other book.
My comments are based on his other threads and his obsession with Revelations. I think he mentioned he had spent 34 years studying that book almost to the exclusion of all other books and previously implied it was the most important book in the Bible. I would contend the Gospels are the most important.
However, if I have misinterpreted the thrust of this thread then I apologise to him.
This is the purpose of the Book pf Revelation !
From this cursory perusal of the book, it is evident that the Seer was influenced by the prophecies of Daniel more than by any other book. Daniel was written with the object of comforting the Jews under the cruel persecution of Antiochus Epiphanes. The Seer in the Apocalypse had a similar purpose. The Christians were fiercely persecuted in the reign of Domitian. The danger of apostasy was great. False prophets went about, trying to seduce the people to conform to the heathen practices and to take part in the Caesar-worship. The Seer urges his Christians to remain true to their faith and to bear their troubles with fortitude. He encourages them with the promise of an ample and speedy reward. He assures them that Christ’s triumphant coming is at hand. Both in the beginning and at the end of his book the Seer is most emphatic in telling his people that the hour of victory is nigh. He begins, saying: “Blessed is he that . . . keepeth those things which are written in it; for the time is at hand” (i. 3). He closes his visions with the pathetic words: “He that giveth testimony of these things saith, Surely I come quickly: Amen. Come, Lord Jesus”. With the coming of Christ the woes of the Christians will be avenged. Their oppressors will be given up to the judgment and the everlasting torments. The martyrs that have fallen will be raised to life, that they may share the pleasures of Christ’s kingdom, the millennium. Yet this is but a prelude to the everlasting beatitude which follows after the general resurrection. It is an article of faith that Christ will return at the end of time to judge the living and the dead. But the time of His second advent is unknown. “But of that day and hour no one knoweth, no, not the angels of heaven, but the Father alone” (Matthew 24:36). It would appear, and is so held by many that the Christians of the Apostolic age expected that Christ would return during their own lifetime or generation. This seems to be the more obvious meaning of several passages both in theEpistles and Gospels (cf. John 21:21-23, 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18). The Christians of Asia Minor and the Seer with them, appear to have shared this fallacious expectation. Their mistaken hope, however, did not affect the soundness of their belief in the essential part of the dogma. Their views of a millennial period of corporal happiness were equally erroneous. The Church has wholly cast aside the doctrine of a millennium previous to the resurrection. St. Augustine has perhaps more than any one else helped to free the Church from all crude fancies as regards its pleasures. He explained the millennium allegorically and applied it to the Church of Christ on earth. With the foundation of the Church the millennium began. The first resurrection is the spiritual resurrection of the soul from sin (De Civ. Dei Lib. XX). Thus the number 1,000 is to be taken indefinitely.
I don’t think you need to apologize. I sometimes find it difficult to understand what he is trying to say, but I think I understood that part. I am still not sure what the thrust of the thread is, either!
Walt- how about add some detail .
I’ll give you guys ,that are interested,a chance to to read.There is only a few on this thread ,as yet.I note thistle is back even you might pick up something though gestalt.walt2000
I think Walt is saying that he recommends to read protestant interpretaions of Apocalypse, but not of any other book.
Not (interpretaions of Apocalypse) they do not have a clue, of the interp. Apocalypse ,what the prods do is just read the Apocalypse,they do not interp. it . they do not understand what they read.walt2000
You’re right, I meant to say protestant translations, not interpretations.
I think your description covers the traditional Catholic interpretation pretty well, but I would say the number 1000 is to be taken figuratively, but not necassarily indefinitley. I think the second coming will come at some point in history.
To add to what you said, read this book review.
Well, now, hold on Athanasius. Even in Revelation 12, Christ is already reigning in “heaven.” But only until Revelation 20 does he come to rule on “earth”. Christ indeed reigns since the Ascension, but we don’t have to believe that the Millennium applies to the totality of this period. For Christ reigns in heaven in the Middle Ages, but the dragon is most certianly not chained then. For after the temporary rest from the serpent, he spews a flood after the woman, and then unable to get her carried away, he raises the beast. So then Rev. 12 to 13 is basically from the Ascension until now. The Millennium is yet future because we are not in the age of peace yet. The minor Chastisement must come and then the glorious reunion of Christians. The Millennium then makes much more sense as the age of peace in which the near totality of humanity not only believes in the Gospel but practices it. For in the Middle Ages, about a fourth of humanity believed, but many times they didn’t practice. But in the age of peace, the majority of humanity will not only believe but also practice the Gospel. That then, is the Millennium, not the entire Church age.
First the dragon wages war in Heaven (pagan Rome), then he causes problems on earth (AD 313 - about 1850). Then he raises an apostasy (1950 - now), then there is a type of Armageddon (the Minor Chas), then he is chained and Christ rules practically on earth through the Gospel’s restoration (the Milllennium), then he is finally released for the great apostasy and AC , then Christ returns and we have the New creation.
we can view the resurrections in an alternative manner. The first resurrection represents the fullest fruits of the redemption within human history, which will indeed be attained in the coming age of peace that follows the imminent chastisement.
the second resurrection unto damnation would then represent the fullest fruits of the fallen nature within human history, which is truly what shall be present in the great apostasy, where, as St. Paul indicates in 2 Thess. 2, the general fallen nature of man will be basically irredeemable at that time in history. Remember, once the Holy Spirit gives the fullness of the Gentiles (the age peace), no further Redemption of the general whole of humanity will be possible afterwards (except the Jews), that is, that is, the Holy Spirit will no longer be able to restrain iniquity because humanity will be in an irrevocable rejection of the truth and grace of God, just as the angels were after their fall.
Look at it this way: for the angels, there is but ONE fall: because before they fall, they FULLY taste of the truth and grace of God (short only, of course, of the Beatific Vision), hence, it is such a radical and completely depraved and arrogant rejection of God, that, as the CCC points it, the sin is unforgivable in its nature.
But when man falls the first time, he does not have that fullness of knowledge, only a little. And so over the course of salvation history, humanity, through the Redemptive actions of God, gradually grows in the knowledge of truth and the experience of grace. Throughout this ordeal, it is a constant alternation between sin and grace. First comes darkness, then comes light, then darkness, then light. And with each successive victory of light, humanity understands and receives more fully of the Divine Knowledge, Love and Grace.
But the fullness of the Gentiles, the age of peace, being the seventh great light, brings man to the fullness of the experience of Redemption. Hence when man falls the eighth time in salvation history, it represents an unforgivable sin historically because it was preceded by the fullness of the experience of God’s Redemption.
So then, after the Millennium, that is, the glorious restoration of Catholic Christendom, it is the SECOND fall of man in human history, but one that is irredeemable, both because it is the ultimate insult to the love, graciousness, and patience of God, as well as the fact that, having tasted the full fruits of God’s Redemption, it will be impossible for man to come back to God (see Hebrews 6).
So, to cap: the first resurrection in a historical sense represents the seventh age of light, the peak of the Redemption within human history, the fullness of the Gentiles. The second resurrection unto death is fullness of iniquity in human history, the great apostasy that follows the age of peace, the ultimate, irrevocable, irredeemable manifestation of sin in human history.
Yes - the second coming , there will be no three coming of Christ .( Mark 13:24-27 : Math24:26-31 ; 2 Thess 2:1-12 )-tribulation and rapture are mentioned together.
Yes , the ‘’figuratively’’ is the right word.
Because the thousand years is symbolic references to the timelessness .
With the Lord one day is like thousand years. )
Spauline ,You seems dedicated yourself to the Eschatology study.
I am interesting about one thing, if the Church is the true continuation of Israel , if the most of the Old Testament prophesies has fulfilled in the New Testament.
If the Church is the True Israel , who continues the true Old Testament faith in following Christ.
How comes that according to some interpretations the state of Israel is considered as a Biblical Israel ?
That Jesus is not the choseness of the Jews.
The theory according to which , it seems that the God choose the Jews not for the holiness but because of their holiness .
I can not understand the theory of some kind of theological racism , or the theory that God has nationality.
Well , it seems like this.
The Israel is the secular state , right ?
There are too many people there , who are not Zionists.
The biggest atheists country in the percentage level.
The country , from where the people are increasingly emigrating to other countries.
The secular country which confess itself as a secular. Yes ?
Why the Christians should base their theological position on the end time prophesies looking at the events at the Middle East and events at the Palestine ?
The rebuilding of the temple ; the territorial extensions in the millenium, ; Is it a political or the Biblical propaganda in the Evangelical movements ?
What do You think ?
Better yet, listen or download an audio version of the book of Revelation, and listen to that several times, it only takes about an hour to listen to the whole book in audio format. ( there are more sites, google it.)
But before you listen to it you might want to read this article by Jimmy akins
Are you making the assumption the Apocalypse occurs in chronological order? That is not necassarily the case.
Sungenis interprets it as a single drama retold 7 times from different perspectives. In this interpretation the story starts at the first coming, ends at the second and is retold 7 times.
Also, as a reference point, is your interpertation similar to Father Kramer in The Book of Destiny ? I have just started reading this book.
I don’t know why you are asking me this. I am not a chiliast, nor am I fundamentalist who is concerned about Mideast politics. I absolutely agree that the Church is now the true Israel, the fulfillment of God’s Plan for the Redemtpion of humanity. I am Catholic. I am just suggesting a view of the Millennium that is sort of a mixture of chiliasm and amill.
I would say this: why does Salvation history stop after the first century and then pick up right before the end of the world. Church history (ALL of it) is part of salvation history as well. Why would the near totality of the age of the Church be in obscurity? Does God take a vacation from Redeeming Humanity between the first and last centuries of the Church? Salvation history is a complete whole. All of the major spiritual developments of Salvation History, from the Fall unto the New Creation, has meaning and purpose.
In view of these things, are you insinuating that Revelation has little to say about the meaning of the Church age in light of all salvation history and is only about the very early Church? That would seem odd to me.
No, Mark, I do not take it absolutely chronologically, and so, on account of that, I would say Father Kramer is missing more deeper elements in his treatment of the text. Especially how, in light of his absolute chronology, he feels Revelation 12 must be dealing almost exclusively with the very end.
No, Mark, I definitely recognize multidimensionallity to the book. Just a few cases in point: the beast and false prophet: in a fully allegorical sense, these images of the Scripture are fulfilled and have been fulfilled many times in salvation history, where, in great ages of sinful resistance to the Divine Love, the devil has incarnated sin in human history, causing humanity to believe in the same lies he uttered in the garden in the beginning. So, in this sense, the False Prophet becomes an image of the spiritual and theological essence of what sin is, and what is implied in the serpent’s perenniall lies that span all of Salvation history, from the Fall to the end of the world.
hence, the beast applies as much to Noah’s day as it does to Egypt, and Antiochus, and pagan Rome, as well as our own modern minor apostasy, in addition to the final manifestation at the great apostasy of the very end.
No, what I meant with the dragon was that the collective scenes of the dragon can be taken to image a spiritual summary of all salvation history. But not that the whole book of the apocalypse is absolutely chronological.
Again, many layers of meaning are possible. I think that is the beauty of Scripture. Many depths and riches all at once in different layers. So, by all means, Augustine’s treatment of the Millennium can be valid in its own right. But I think other layers of meaning can be present.
Similarly, with the Two Witnesses. Because Father Kramer assumes a strict chronology, he sees the Two Witnesses as exclusively Enoch and Elijah at the very end times of Antichrist, when, if we view the scene of the two Witnesses as an “intermission” that summarizes the stage of the trumpets (which I liken to the illuminitative phase of the saint, or the derivative OT age of the prophets), then it can be viewed as a metaphorical summary of ecclesiiological history and the ultimate reunion of Christians after the general period ecclesiological stress.
Anyway, don’t know if this helps?
Again, I dont know how people can claim to read and know hebrew scripture and refuse to believe that Israel, that is the Messiah, land and the people; are smack dab in the middle of end times prophecy.