|
|
Post by stormyknight on May 16, 2018 14:39:33 GMT -6
I would caution you with Judaism. Judaism is not for us as we are Christians. Did not Paul..think it was Paul...who said that you cannot pour new wine into an old bottle but to pour new wine into the new bottle. And old wine you cannot pour into a new bottle. Understand the history and the OT is one thing, practicing is another. Many things were a shadow of things to come. Paul is clear on many things. I agree whole-heartedly on this. Jesus made it clear as well that the Pharisees were applying the letter of the Law and ignoring the Spirit of the Law. We, on the other hand, are able, and certainly willing with the help of the Holy Spirit, to keep the Spirit of the Law knowing full well we are not able to keep the letter of the Law. The new wine in new bottles.
Also, about Eusebius' "Hence there were synods and convocations of the bishops on this question; and all unanimously drew up the ecclesiastical decree, which they communicated to all the churches in all places, that the mystery of our Lords resurrection should be celebrated on no other day than the Lords day." Sounds like typical Catholic Pomp and Circumstance for something that no where in Scripture are we asked or commanded to celebrate the "Lord's Day". The Sabbath is for rest not worship, except in the sense that resting on the Sabbath is honoring YHWH who made it. The simplest proof that God exists is that there are seven days in a week, the seventh being created because He rested on it. I don't know of any other religion that tells of their god creating time. There may be, I just have not heard of it. I feel I must apologize for my negativity toward the catholic church, I have been very cynical towards it for a very long time and learning to forgive that I felt I was led astray, however unintentionally by my teachers, has been difficult. I know now that we all, at one time, had a veil before our eyes until our Heavenly Father removed it, called us, to follow His Son Jesus. "The hearing ear and the seeing eye, The LORD has made both of them." Prov. 20:12
witness1 As Matt 27:45-50 shows, Jesus died about the ninth hour, or 3 o'clock in the afternoon. So there certainly is some leeway in the time frame for 3.5 days and still be 3 days and 3 nights. |
|
|
|
Post by stormyknight on May 16, 2018 14:49:28 GMT -6
This is an interesting idea. Can we push this a bit? I feel it would be helpful to define "the church of Thyatira" and "Jezebel". What exactly is "the harlot"? What exactly do we mean by "Catholicism"? Are we talking about the true believers within Catholicism or the overarching doctrines that are at the core of the church (comprised of the popes and archbishops)? I see 2 options here: 1) Catholicism (as defined by the overarching false doctrines/pope/archbishops) is the church of Thyatira. Jezebel is the harlot. If this is the case, what exactly is "Jezebel"? 2) The true followers of Jesus within the RCC is the church of Thyatira. Then the teaching of Catholicism (overarching false doctrines/pope/archbishops) and Jezebel are one in the same- the harlot. I hope this makes sense. My main question is... who comprises "the church of Thyatira"? True believers within the Catholic church? Or the pope and the archbishops and the whole system? Secondarily, exactly how is Jezebel defined? My thought here is that the Church of Thyatira is the true believers within the catholic church and it's daughters(protestant, sda, mormon, etc.) as it is all the true believers to whom the letters to the seven churches are aim at. Jezebel, IMO, is the Catholic hierarchy itself. She is the one riding the beast, holding the cup, etc. |
|
|
|
Post by venge on May 16, 2018 16:30:56 GMT -6
This is an interesting idea. Can we push this a bit? I feel it would be helpful to define "the church of Thyatira" and "Jezebel". What exactly is "the harlot"? What exactly do we mean by "Catholicism"? Are we talking about the true believers within Catholicism or the overarching doctrines that are at the core of the church (comprised of the popes and archbishops)? I see 2 options here: 1) Catholicism (as defined by the overarching false doctrines/pope/archbishops) is the church of Thyatira. Jezebel is the harlot. If this is the case, what exactly is "Jezebel"? 2) The true followers of Jesus within the RCC is the church of Thyatira. Then the teaching of Catholicism (overarching false doctrines/pope/archbishops) and Jezebel are one in the same- the harlot. I hope this makes sense. My main question is... who comprises "the church of Thyatira"? True believers within the Catholic church? Or the pope and the archbishops and the whole system? Secondarily, exactly how is Jezebel defined? My thought here is that the Church of Thyatira is the true believers within the catholic church and it's daughters(protestant, sda, mormon, etc.) as it is all the true believers to whom the letters to the seven churches are aim at. Jezebel, IMO, is the Catholic hierarchy itself. She is the one riding the beast, holding the cup, etc. I would place my opinion as the Catholic Church has true believers just as there were Jews who followed the right way: Moses, Elijah etc Jezebel imo is the religion not of Catholics but the false religion we see of the beast empire to which I believe is Islam. Where Witnesses video is interesting because it shows Islam being accepted into the Catholic Church I Should add that this is just one opinion. And that by no means is it 100%. More study needs to be done in this area. |
|
|
|
Post by witness1 on May 16, 2018 16:49:48 GMT -6
venge , Ignatius' epistle concerns me a bit. Does he mean that a Christian should not practice Judaism as a whole or just the parts that were added to what God taught them? Meaning the parts that Jesus, Himself, denounced the Pharisees about, "straining at a gnat and swallow a camel". They made Judaism into more that it was meant to be. But if the whole of Judaism is thrown out, how are we to know on what day Pentecost falls on. It's always on Sunday, yes, but only because it is the day after the seventh Sabbath from Passover. And then there is all the nations of the Earth coming up to Jerusalem to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles during the reign of Jesus Christ the King. "Thus says the LORD of hosts, 'In those days ten men from all the nations will grasp the garment of a Jew, saying, "Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you."' Zech 8:23 Maybe it's just my opinion, but I think we should not turn our backs on Judaism. It does say that the early disciples gathered on some occasions on the first day of the week, but there is no explanation in scripture as to why, except for Pentecost. Anyway, this has sidetracked from what I was pointing out and that was the use of the word Sabbaton in Mark 16:2 and it being translated to 'the first day of the week'. Also, I would be careful, venge, as one can see in Ignatius' writings that the seed of apostasy was already being planted, which today can clearly be seen in the Papal government. "I exhort you to study to do all things with a divine harmony, while your bishop presides in the place of God, and your presbyters in the place of the assembly of the apostles, along with your deacons, who are most dear to me, and are entrusted with the ministry of Jesus Christ, who was with the Father before the beginning of time, and in the end was revealed." The Epistle of Ignatius to the Magnesians Chapter 6. Vicarius Filii Dei is what was thought to be inscribed on the Pope's mitre. In actuality, the closest evidence to this is Pope Pius IX's tiara in 1871: IESV CHRISTI VICARIO INFALLIBILI ORBIS SVPREMO IN TERRA RECTORI REGVM ATQVE POPVLORVM PATRI which translates to: To The Infallible Vicar of Jesus Christ To the Supreme Governor of the World on Earth To the Father of Nations and Kings (from biblelight.net/claims.htm#1877 ) While this probably doesn't add up to 666 as the former phrase does, it does tend to make a person look sidelong at it and wonder. "Infallible"?? "Supreme Governor"?? I think that position is reserved for Jesus Christ Himself and no other. I'm sorry, but Catholicism has left a bad impression on me from my earliest childhood. I know it's not the people of catholicism, it's the leadership that, I think, is corrupt. well, enough ranting. May our Heavenly Father bless us with wisdom and forgive us our mistakes, I pray in Jesus' Holy and Righteous name. I would caution you with Judaism. Judaism is not for us as we are Christians. Did not Paul..think it was Paul...who said that you cannot pour new wine into an old bottle but to pour new wine into the new bottle. And old wine you cannot pour into a new bottle. Understand the history and the OT is one thing, practicing is another. Many things were a shadow of things to come. Paul is clear on many things. Eusebius also said: Eusebius Ecclesiastical History, Book 1, Chapter 5 Eusebius Ecclesiastical History, Book 5, Chapter 23 On a side note, I agree Catholicism has problems. I believe it is the Church of revelation that suffers that women Jezebel. It sleeps with the Harlot and welcomes her into his bed. Mixing religions. Welcoming another instead of Christ. I'm confused venge... above it looks like you're saying that Catholicism is at least part of Jezebel??? |
|
|
|
Post by venge on May 16, 2018 17:08:14 GMT -6
Not Catholicism is a part of Jezebel but they suffer Jezebel. That is to say that Catholicism is mingling with the religion of Jezebel. Jezebel was the daughter of Ithobal. They worshipped Baal.
So I am saying that this type of Christianity under Catholicism is mixing with the influence of another religion taking into the room excepting it being friends with it even saying things like their God is the same as our God.
Interfaith dialogue, that’s where the Catholicism calls it, Is extremely dangerous. Christ never said that we should mix his testimony with another religion
|
|
|
|
Post by witness1 on May 16, 2018 18:30:29 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by witness1 on May 16, 2018 19:28:52 GMT -6
stormyknight, sorry to deviate from the original thread topic. Is there more to talk about regarding the word "sabbaton"? It is quite curious that the only time it's translated as "week" is in relation to the day Jesus rose. I'm having a hard time reconciling the fact that Scripture also says He would rise "on the third day" though since anytime after dusk on Friday would be "the fourth day" (Wed- day 1, Thur- day 2, Fri- day 3, Sat- day 4). Is it possible that this "third day" counted from the time He was buried, which was evening on Wednesday and therefore possibly Thursday?
|
|
|
|
Post by stormyknight on May 16, 2018 20:39:46 GMT -6
stormyknight , sorry to deviate from the original thread topic. Is there more to talk about regarding the word "sabbaton"? It is quite curious that the only time it's translated as "week" is in relation to the day Jesus rose. I'm having a hard time reconciling the fact that Scripture also says He would rise "on the third day" though since anytime after dusk on Friday would be "the fourth day" (Wed- day 1, Thur- day 2, Fri- day 3, Sat- day 4). Is it possible that this "third day" counted from the time He was buried, which was evening on Wednesday and therefore possibly Thursday? Well, I guess that would only work if you count Wednesday as the first day. Seeing as how Jesus died about the ninth hour, there were only three hours left in that day. Just enough time to get His body laid in the tomb and also why His body was not properly 'treated for burial', for lack of a better term. Thursday being a High Sabbath, they had to get His body in the tomb by sunset so as not to desecrate the Sabbath. So, yes, I would say the count of three started when He was buried. "For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." Matt. 12:40 If He rose right at sunset, or just before, it would still be on the third day. So, while I'm still curious as to why the word 'sabbaton' was used, I'm convinced that the first day of the week is what was meant. Also, I rather enjoy when a thread takes a tangent. Sometimes it really helps to find out new understanding of scripture when that happens. As for the catholic church being equated to Jezebel or the Harlot: "Children, it is the last hour; and just as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. This is how we know it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they did not belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But their departure made it clear that none of them belonged to us." 1 John 2:19 I believe this is what convinces me that the catholic church is the woman riding the beast. There were those among the disciples that became 'anti-christian', they "went out from us", but they were, at one time, part of the group, so they were Christians. This tells me that the woman riding the beast was formerly Christian and probably still pretends to be such. Unless you adhere to the belief that the catholic church had a hand in bringing the Islamic faith into being, thus making it one of it's daughters like the protestant churches, I would rule Islam out as being THE Harlot. "They", IMO, were those that became the hierarchy of the catholic church. There were probably more of "them" at gatherings such as the Council of Nicea and they had the majority rule on what books were included in what is today's canonical bible. Though I do believe that what books were included are only what God allowed to be included. After all, the Book of Enoch specifically states it is for those who live in the end times and it is only now gaining traction among many true believers. So, ya, I'd say the Harlot riding the beast is Hierarchy of the catholic church, not the lay-people that make up millions of practicing members. I believe the Body of Christ are those called out of every group, congregation, etc, of every faith on Earth. |
|
|
|
Post by barbiosheepgirl on May 16, 2018 22:00:44 GMT -6
stormyknight, no reason for me to disagree..however... " they went out from us" lands on my ears with a whole different meaning. Was not John a (messianic) Jew? In Acts they say that thousands of jews came to believe the Gospel, this from Acts as an example: And when they heard it, they glorified the Lord, and said unto him, Thou seest, brother, how many thousands of Jews there are which believe; and they are all zealous of the law:
Being "one of us" could it also indicate, and from this passage too from Acts, that they (jews) believed, but also were devoted to the law...and as we see within the Christian faith, law can "get in the way" of faith. So these that went out from us, were of the jew, whose seed landed in poor soil. They were convinced at first, but then fell back into their laws and traditions. PLUS, the pressure of the leadership of the Sadducees/Pharisees was there...all thruout Acts we see the struggle there. At least Christian churches whom we are watching very closely are not denying Christ corporately. I would certainly believe there is a lot of false teaching, a lot of unnecessary ritual, and flat out deception and distortion, but not formally denying Jesus....but who today denies Christ? Is it not the Jew? I think this is something to really consider when we look at who the Jew is looking for in their Messiah who is yet to come...
|
|
|
|
Post by venge on May 17, 2018 4:53:41 GMT -6
stormyknight , sorry to deviate from the original thread topic. Is there more to talk about regarding the word "sabbaton"? It is quite curious that the only time it's translated as "week" is in relation to the day Jesus rose. I'm having a hard time reconciling the fact that Scripture also says He would rise "on the third day" though since anytime after dusk on Friday would be "the fourth day" (Wed- day 1, Thur- day 2, Fri- day 3, Sat- day 4). Is it possible that this "third day" counted from the time He was buried, which was evening on Wednesday and therefore possibly Thursday? Well, I guess that would only work if you count Wednesday as the first day. Seeing as how Jesus died about the ninth hour, there were only three hours left in that day. Just enough time to get His body laid in the tomb and also why His body was not properly 'treated for burial', for lack of a better term. Thursday being a High Sabbath, they had to get His body in the tomb by sunset so as not to desecrate the Sabbath. So, yes, I would say the count of three started when He was buried. "For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." Matt. 12:40 If He rose right at sunset, or just before, it would still be on the third day. So, while I'm still curious as to why the word 'sabbaton' was used, I'm convinced that the first day of the week is what was meant. Also, I rather enjoy when a thread takes a tangent. Sometimes it really helps to find out new understanding of scripture when that happens. As for the catholic church being equated to Jezebel or the Harlot: "Children, it is the last hour; and just as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have appeared. This is how we know it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they did not belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But their departure made it clear that none of them belonged to us." 1 John 2:19 I believe this is what convinces me that the catholic church is the woman riding the beast. There were those among the disciples that became 'anti-christian', they "went out from us", but they were, at one time, part of the group, so they were Christians. This tells me that the woman riding the beast was formerly Christian and probably still pretends to be such. Unless you adhere to the belief that the catholic church had a hand in bringing the Islamic faith into being, thus making it one of it's daughters like the protestant churches, I would rule Islam out as being THE Harlot. "They", IMO, were those that became the hierarchy of the catholic church. There were probably more of "them" at gatherings such as the Council of Nicea and they had the majority rule on what books were included in what is today's canonical bible. Though I do believe that what books were included are only what God allowed to be included. After all, the Book of Enoch specifically states it is for those who live in the end times and it is only now gaining traction among many true believers. So, ya, I'd say the Harlot riding the beast is Hierarchy of the catholic church, not the lay-people that make up millions of practicing members. I believe the Body of Christ are those called out of every group, congregation, etc, of every faith on Earth. Stormy knight, If you believe the Catholic Church to be the harlot, we need to look at a few things. Anyone with Christ is not against Christ though he may sin. That is why he rebuked the churches. Are Catholics actually against Christ? No. They are not. The way they practice, is it contrary to what God wants? Yes it is. That makes them a church that loves Christ but has left the Shepard. They’ve gone into their own ways to the left and the right. Does the Catholic Church to fulfill Babylon sit on 7 heads of the beast? Sitting on it is controlling it. She rides it and steers it. But as rider, she is absent from its destructive path. She’s too good for murder. She enjoys it but doesn’t participate. She’s a queen and needs to look like royalty. Let us then decide what are the 7 heads of the beast. No one can determine Babylon before that is determined scripturally first. Must use scripture. Not people outside of scripture. Not events outside of scripture |
|
|
|
Post by stormyknight on May 17, 2018 10:20:35 GMT -6
one quick answer about who denies Christ, if you haven't already, please read the recent article on Unsealed.org called The Wolf.
As I said, venge, I don't believe catholics are against Christ, but the hierarchy is. The Pope, the Cardinals and bishops, or at least a lot of them are going along with Pope Francis. I'm sure there are those within the Vatican and around the world that are looking wide-eyed at that Pope at what he has been saying, but yet they don't want to lose their position, so they speak cautiously. insidethevatican.com/news/newsflash/letter-28-last-battle/barbiosheepgirl , the disciples and first converts to follow Jesus were made up of both Jews and Gentile alike. The Jews knew the law so, yes, they likely were zealous of the law as we, ourselves, should be.
"And one of the scribes came, and having heard them reasoning together, and perceiving that he had answered them well, asked him, Which is the first commandment of all? And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these." Mark 12:28-31
But, all of these people, disciples and new converts, Jews and Gentiles, were the first Christians. John was speaking about the AntiChrist or AntiChrists in the end times in 1 John 2:19. John thought he was in the end times, himself. "Children, it is the last hour" Now, satan having failed to stop Jesus' Gospel by having Him killed, apparently would try an alternate route, infiltrate and change the Gospel, all the while appearing to be a good Christian,
"For such men are false apostles, deceitful workers, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will correspond to their actions" 2 Cor. 11:14
------------
venge, if you've got the time, here is a good video that has, IMO, a good explanation of who the beasts are with the appropriate bible references.
I realize that prophecies that have not been fulfilled are speculated on the part of the presenter, whoever that may be, but with the help of history, those speculations become an educated guesses. The part of this video where he explains why the United States is the "And I saw another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like unto lamb, and he spake as a dragon." Rev. 13:11 is new to me, I had not looked at it quite that way before. Meh, could be right, I don't know. But the explanations prior about the 'little horn', yes, I think he's right.
Now the description of the woman riding the beast in Rev. 17 is pretty specific.
"And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication: And upon her forehead was a name written, MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH." Rev. 17:4-5
It doesn't take much of an image search on Google to find pictures of the Cardinals and Bishops of the Vatican all decked out in purple and scarlet, or the Pope wearing gold and precious stones and pearls holding a golden cup, which by the way, is allegedly filled with the blood of Jesus Christ(symbolically), having been changed from water by the person(Pope, priest) holding the mass. The same goes for the Eucharist being turned into the body/flesh of Jesus Christ. This hearkens back to the ancient Babylonian Mystery Religion. Yes, it is supposed to be a re-enactment of the Last Supper, but the way they go about it is supposed to be a mystery(magic/miracle). I've even participated in it as an altar boy, ringing a set of bells that is supposed to give the moment the 'miracle' takes place a more mystical atmosphere.
"And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth." Rev. 17:18
What city in all of history has ever 'reigned' over multiple leaders of the countries of the Earth? First that comes to my mind is Vatican City/Rome.
This is not definitive on my part. I know I may/can/will be wrong on some points. Please forgive me. We're all trying to unravel the truth in Scripture, right? With the help of the Holy Spirit, of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by venge on May 17, 2018 13:49:20 GMT -6
I will look at the video tonight when I get home to my WiFi lol.
From reading your excerpt on the kingdom of God thread, I’d assume you believe Babylon is Jerusalem as you stated verses pertaining to they shed the blood of prophets but I had an issue with that because Babylon becomes ruinous forever and it’s smoke goes up forever. Then, if it was Jerusalem...it would be destroyed and never built? That would oppose what we read later in Revelation.
I am familiar with all the typical Catholic hoopla of AC. I am also familiar with conspiracy theory stuff that finds its way in. Most of it imo is not true or accurate based on bad definitions, faulty interpretation, and improper study that one can refute. The Bible is 100% so a good thesis needs to be accurate. Not just thrown together with pictures which is typical today.
I have taken the meaning of colors and gold differently in regards to what Babylon holds. I will say, Jerusalem does sit on 7 heads, but Rome does not. Rome only sits on one head in my research making it ineligible. We need to look at every city that sits on all 7 heads now and in the past. How do you define a head? What is the first head?
|
|
|
|
Post by stormyknight on May 17, 2018 14:45:12 GMT -6
venge, I had to go the Kingdom of God thread as I couldn't remember participating in that one. I think you are thinking of silentknight's postings. Similar usernames. But, no, I'm of the mind that the Vatican hierarchy is Babylon. I do agree with you that it would be a good idea to start a thread, throw out all preconceived ideas and start from just Scripture and see what we can come up with.
|
|
|
|
Post by venge on May 17, 2018 17:16:51 GMT -6
venge , I had to go the Kingdom of God thread as I couldn't remember participating in that one. I think you are thinking of silentknight's postings. Similar usernames. But, no, I'm of the mind that the Vatican hierarchy is Babylon. I do agree with you that it would be a good idea to start a thread, throw out all preconceived ideas and start from just Scripture and see what we can come up with. Youre right lol, silent knight not stormy knight. |
|
|
|
Post by barbiosheepgirl on May 17, 2018 19:03:47 GMT -6
He seems to be very clear on who is the antichrist person in a definition sense applying it to his time writing. Here is a few verses earlier:
18Children, it is the last hour; and just as you heard that antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have appeared; from this we know that it is the last hour.
Even more interesting is why: so that it would be shown that they all are not of us. John is making a distinction of who is the Believer and one not believing, and moreso, DENYING.
24As for you, let that abide in you which you heard from the beginning...
and you have no need for anyone to teach you; but as His anointing teaches you about all things, and is true and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you abide in Him.
The roman church was not in existence when John wrote this, which commentary says 85-95 AD (from wikipedia)
Who could possibly want to swade new believers from the Truth in John's time? Those in religious power at the time? the Jewish religious leaders,,,according to commentary we are past the destruction of the the temple, so am not sure where all the jewish religious leaders are at this point, or what how they are influencing, and I am aware there was the threat of the gnostics. Jude's account talks about a lot of things applied to Christ-following deceivers that seem New Age to me when I read Jude..anyways..
Its an interesting context and concern by John to warn on this stuff.
|
|
