Revelation: The Bride, The Beast & Babylon

[Leuko Petra]

Revelation: The Bride, The Beast & Babylon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvASosgagBw

...

For there is nothing hid, which shall not be manifested; neither was any thing kept secret, but that it should come abroad. Mark 4:22

 

[SwordoftheLord]

it looks interesting....

 

[Hentenza]

The early church did not tumble into apostasy.

 

[Stryder06]

The early church did not tumble into apostasy.

You really believe that?

 

[Hentenza]

You really believe that?

Yes. Is tenuous at best to believe that the early church, and even the churches that followed, apostasy only to be "rescued" by EGW in the 19th century. Is quite absurd.

 

[Stryder06]

Yes. Is tenuous at best to believe that the early church, and even the churches that followed, apostasy only to be "rescued" by EGW in the 19th century. Is quite absurd.

You misunderstand, the "church" as in those who remained faithful to God, never fell. The "Church" as in those who professed godliness but denied the power thereof, are the result of apostasy, falling away from the true. And EGW didn't resuce anything. Those individuals simply carried on the reformation moving. Going from truth to truth.

 

[Hentenza]

You misunderstand, the "church" as in those who remained faithful to God, never fell. The "Church" as in those who professed godliness but denied the power thereof, are the result of apostasy, falling away from the true. And EGW didn't resuce anything. Those individuals simply carried on the reformation moving. Going from truth to truth.

Sorry Stryder but you lost me here. Which church professed godliness but denied the power thereof?

 

[Stryder06]

Sorry Stryder but you lost me here. Which church professed godliness but denied the power thereof?

The false ones that drew members after them. I'm not speaking about any particular denomination in this case, but Paul warned of false teachers who would come after him, and in Revelation, Christ spoke about "those who say they are jews and are not".

There has always been a true church, and out of it came a false one. That's how I understand early apostasy.

 

[Leuko Petra]

The early church did not tumble into apostasy.

If you really want to look at history, and prophecy let me know, and we can actually discuss it.

...but we were all warned numerous ways:

Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 2 Thessalonians 2:3

Look up the greek for that in "red".

 

[Leuko Petra]

In Fact, check out the official site:

Revelation: The Bride, The Beast & Babylon

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by Hentenza

The early church did not tumble into apostasy.
​

The OC Judean rulers accused our bro Paul of apostasy from Moses.
I have a thread on that here for those interested

http://www.christianforums.com/t7280592-3/
What is the Apostasy in 2 Thess 2?
I was studying on the greek word used for "apostasy" in 2 Thess 2:3 and what is interesting that word is used in Acts 21:21 concerning the Judeans concern about teaching against the customs of Moses.

Scripture4All - Greek/Hebrew interlinear Bible software

Acts 21:21 "They were instructed yet about the apostasy/apo-stasian <646> thou are teaching from Moses, the according to the nations all Judeans saying 'no to be circumcising them the offsprings, no yet to the customs to be about walking'". [Daniel 11:32,35]

2 Thess 2:3 No any ye should be deluding according to no yet one manner/way, that if-ever no may be coming the apostasy/from-standing/apo-stasia <646> first.
And may be being un-covered the Man of the Sin, the Son of the destruction/apwleiaV <684>.

I then decided to look at Daniel 11 a little more closely as I view this event as both the Olivet Discourse and Revelation. Notice ones doing "wickedly" toward a Covenant in Dan 11:32. What Covenant would that be? [Daniel 11 was a "buger bear" to translate! LOL]Thoughts?

Daniel 11:32 And-ones-doing-wickedly, a-Covenant shall-pollute/defile in-smooth-flatteries, and-with Ones-knowing 'elohiym-of-him, they-shall-be-steadfast and-they-do.
35 And-from the-Intelligent-Ones, they-shall-stumble, to-refine in-them and-to-purify and-to-whiten until era-of end that further to-Appointed-Time.

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary
JESUS AND PAUL VS THE APOSTATE JUDEAN RULERS







.



.

 

[Hentenza]

If you really want to look at history, and prophecy let me know, and we can actually discuss it.

...but we were all warned numerous ways:

Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; 2 Thessalonians 2:3

Look up the greek for that in "red".

2 Thess 2:3 is prophesy not history. There will be a falling away AFTER the restrainer is removed. I fail to see how this verse explains the tumbling to apostasy by the early church claimed by the video.

 

[Hentenza]

In Fact, check out the official site:

Revelation: The Bride, The Beast & Babylon

No thanks. Had enough with the trailer.

 

[Leuko Petra]

2 Thess 2:3 is prophesy not history. There will be a falling away AFTER the restrainer is removed. I fail to see how this verse explains the tumbling to apostasy by the early church claimed by the video.

Brother Hentenza, 2 Thessalonians "falling away" is indeed "history". The "falling away" [&#945;&#960;&#959;&#963;&#964;&#945;&#963;&#953;&#945;; apostasia, iow: apostacy] has already taken place... the "let" [hindrance] [2 Thessalonians 2:7] was the Pagan/Imperial Roman Empire...

History attests to that fact, and it was known way back when...:

&#8220;...Again, in the second epistle he addresses them with even greater earnestness: ... For that day shall not come, unless indeed there first come a falling away, he means indeed of this present empire, and that man of sin be revealed, that is to say, Antichrist, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or religion; so that he sits in the temple of God, affirming that he is God. Do you not remember, that when I was with you, I used to tell you these things? And now you know what detains, that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity does already work; only he who now hinders must hinder, until he be taken out of the way. 2 Thessalonians 2:1-7 What obstacle is there but the Roman state, the falling away of which, by being scattered into ten kingdoms, shall introduce Antichrist ...&#8221; [Roman Catholic Online Fathers Of The Church; On The Resurrection Of The Flesh (Tertullian); &#8220;Chapter 24. Other Passages Quoted from St. Paul, Which Categorically Assert the Resurrection of the Flesh at the Final Judgment.&#8221;] - CHURCH FATHERS: On the Resurrection of the Flesh (Tertullian)


&#8220;...There is also another and a greater necessity for our offering prayer in behalf of the emperors, nay, for the complete stability of the empire, and for Roman interests in general. For we know that a mighty shock impending over the whole earth&#8212; in fact, the very end of all things threatening dreadful woes&#8212; is only re tard ed by the continued existence of the Roman empire. We have no desire, then, to be overtaken by these dire events; and in praying that their coming may be delayed, we are lending our aid to Rome's duration. ...&#8221; [Roman Catholic Online Fathers Of The Church; Apology (Tertullian; Chapter 32)] - CHURCH FATHERS: Apology (Tertullian)


"... One may naturally enquire, what is that which withholds, and after that would know, why Paul expresses it so obscurely. What then is it that withholds, that is, hinders him from being revealed? Some indeed say, the grace of the Spirit, but others the Roman empire, to whom I most of all accede. Wherefore? Because if he meant to say the Spirit, he would not have spoken obscurely, but plainly, that even now the grace of the Spirit, that is the gifts, withhold him. And otherwise he ought now to have come, if he was about to come when the gifts ceased; for they have long since ceased. But because he said this of the Roman empire, he naturally glanced at it, and speaks covertly and darkly. For he did not wish to bring upon himself superfluous enmities, and useless dangers. For if he had said that after a little while the Roman empire would be dissolved, they would immediately have even overwhelmed him, as a pestilent person, and all the faithful, as living and warring to this end. And he did not say that it will be quickly, although he is always saying it&#8212; but what? &#8220;that he may be revealed in his own season,&#8221;... But he did not also wish to point him out plainly: and this not from cowardice, but instructing us not to bring upon ourselves unnecessary enmities, when there is nothing to call for it. So indeed he also says here. &#8220;Only there is one that restrains now, until he be taken out of the way&#8221;, that is, when the Roman empire is taken out of the way, then he shall come. And naturally. For as long as the fear of this empire lasts, no one will willingly exalt himself, but when that is dissolved, he will attack the anarchy, and endeavor to seize upon the government both of man and of God. For as the kingdoms before this were destroyed, for example, that of the Medes by the Babylonians, that of the Babylonians by the Persians, that of the Persians by the Macedonians, that of the Macedonians by the Romans: &#8230; And these things Daniel delivered to us with great clearness. ...&#8221; [Roman Catholic Online Fathers Of The Church; Homilies On Second Thessalonians (Chrysostom); Homily 4] - CHURCH FATHERS: Homily 4 on Second Thessalonians (Chrysostom)


&#8220;...The impediment is the Roman Empire; the main event impeded is the "man of sin" (most Latin Fathers and later interpreters) ...&#8221; [Roman Catholic Online Encyclopedia; &#8220;A&#8221;; Antichrist; In The Pauline Epistles; [second option of 4 listed]] - CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Antichrist


&#8220;...I will nevertheless mention such conjectures as I have heard or read.

Some think that the Apostle Paul referred to the Roman empire, and that he was unwilling to use language more explicit, lest he should incur the calumnious charge of wishing ill to the empire which it was hoped would be eternal; &#8230; However, it is not absurd to believe that these words of the apostle, &#8220;Only he who now holds, let him hold until he be taken out of the way,&#8221; refer to the Roman empire, as if it were said, &#8220;Only he who now reigns, let him reign until he be taken out of the way.&#8221; &#8220;And then shall the wicked be revealed:&#8221; no one doubts that this means Antichrist. ...&#8221; [Roman Catholic Online Fathers Of The Church; The City of God (Book XX); (St. Agustine); Concerning the last judgment, and the declarations regarding it in the old and new testaments.; Chapter 19.&#8212; What the Apostle Paul Wrote to the Thessalonians About the Manifestation of Antichrist Which Shall Precede the Day of the Lord.] - CHURCH FATHERS: City of God, Book XX (St. Augustine)


&#8220;... 23. Now since these things, spoken as they are with a mystical meaning, may seem to some hard to understand, we shall keep back nothing fitted to impart an intelligent apprehension of them to those who are possessed of a sound mind. He said, then, that a "lioness came up from the sea," and by that he meant the kingdom of the Babylonians in the world, which also was the head of gold on the image. In saying that "it had wings as of an eagle," he meant that Nebuchadnezzar the king was lifted up and was exalted against God. Then he says, "the wings thereof were plucked," that is to say, his glory was destroyed; for he was driven out of his kingdom. And the words, "a man's heart was given to it, and it was made stand upon the feet as a man," refer to the fact that he repented and recognised himself to be only a man, and gave the glory to God.

24. Then, after the lioness, he sees a "second beast like a bear," and that denoted the Persians. For after the Babylonians, the Persians held the sovereign power And in saving that there were "three ribs in the mouth of it," he pointed to three nations, viz., the Persians, and the Medes, and the Babylonians; which were also represented on the image by the silver after the gold. Then (there was) "the third beast, a leopard," which meant the Greeks. For after the Persians, Alexander of Macedon obtained the sovereign power on subverting Darius, as is also shown by the brass on the image. And in saying that it had "four wings of a fowl," he taught us most clearly how the kingdom of Alexander was partitioned. For in speaking of "four heads," he made mention of four kings, viz., those who arose out of that (kingdom). For Alexander, when dying, partitioned out his kingdom into four divisions.

25. Then he says: "A fourth beast, dreadful and terrible; it had iron teeth and claws of brass." And who are these but the Romans? Which (kingdom) is meant by the iron&#8212; the kingdom which is now established; for the legs of that (image) were of iron. And after this, what remains, beloved, but the toes of the feet of the image, in which part is iron and part clay, mixed together? And mystically by the toes of the feet he meant the kings who are to arise from among them; as Daniel also says (in the words), "I considered the beast, and lo there were ten horns behind it, among which shall rise another (horn), an offshoot, and shall pluck up by the roots the three (that were) before it." And under this was signified none other than Antichrist &#8230;

...28. The golden head of the image and the lioness denoted the Babylonians; the shoulders and arms of silver, and the bear, represented the Persians and Medes; the belly and thighs of brass, and the leopard, meant the Greeks, who held the sovereignty from Alexander's time; the legs of iron, and the beast dreadful and terrible, expressed the Romans, who hold the sovereignty at present; the toes of the feet which were part clay and part iron, and the ten horns, were emblems of the kingdoms that are yet to rise; the other little horn that grows up among them meant the Antichrist in their midst; the stone that smites the earth and brings judgment upon the world was Christ. ...&#8221; [Roman Catholic Online Fathers Of The Church; On Christ and Antichrist (Hippolytus), section 23-25,28 - CHURCH FATHERS: On Christ and Antichrist (Hippolytus)


"5. The Fathers held that the Roman empire was the "let," or hindrance, referred to by Paul in 2 Thessalonians, which kept back the manifestation of the "man of sin." This point is of great importance. Paul distinctly tells us that he knew, and that the Thessalonians knew, what that hindrance was, and that it was then in existence. The early Church, through the writings of the Fathers, tells us what it knew upon the subject, and with remarkable unanimity affirms that this "let," or hindrance, was the Roman empire as governed by the Caesars; that while the Caesars held imperial power, it was impossible for the predicted antichrist to arise, and that on the fall of the Caesars he would arise. Here we have a point on which Paul affirms the existence of knowledge in the Christian Church. The early Church knew, he says, what this hindrance was. The early Church tells us what it did know upon the subject, and no one in these days can be in a position to contradict its testimony as to what Paul had, by word of mouth only, told the Thessalonians. It is a point on which ancient tradition alone can have any authority. Modern speculation is positively impertinent on such a subject.4 &#8230; From Irenaeus, who lived close to apostolic times, down to Chrysostom and Jerome, the Fathers taught that the power withholding the manifestation of the "man of sin" was the Roman empire as governed by the Caesars. The Fathers therefore belong to the historic, and not to the futurist school of interpretation; for futurists imagine that the hindrance to the manifestation of the man of sin is still in existence, though the Caesars have long since passed away. ...&#8221; [Romanism and the Reformation; H. Grattan Guiness; Pg 52-53] - http://www.whitehorsemedia.com/docs/ROMANISM_AND_THE_REFORMATION.pdf

I will leave you with others:

http://biblelight.net/fathers-on-antichrist.htm

 

[Second Phoenix]

Revelation: The Bride, The Beast & Babylon

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WvASosgagBw

...

For there is nothing hid, which shall not be manifested; neither was any thing kept secret, but that it should come abroad. Mark 4:22

Thank goodness a poorly produced video is here to save us from 2000 years of belief and bring us into the 'true' faith of a group that wrongly predicted the end of the world twice, and then obsessed about Saturday worship, without understanding why Christians gather on the 8th day. Then denied the Trinity, and goes door to door preying on lonely people, who will do anything, anything just to have attention.

They now prey on conspiracy theorists and the historically ignorant into believing fantastical tales that in no way line up with even the most secular, anti-Christian academics.

 

[Second Phoenix]

This has a touch of Gnosticism - the pride of secretly knowing the truth, of being in on a big secret, even if it is totally absurd.

I wish Revelation could be read for what it was - instead of being horribly abused and having things grossly read into it. The statue of liberty has seven points on her head- I guess that's the horns of the beast or some other such nonsense.

The Book of Revelation was written for its people, it's not a time capsule to be picked up and read only by those at the end. It was meant to be read aloud in Churches from the first to the last. It wasn't meant to be quoted in bits on a youtube video in the early 21st Century to support nonsense.

 

[Leuko Petra]

...why Christians gather on the 8th day...

The "8th day" theology is Gnostic Ogdoad... not Christian.

"...The concept of an Ogdoad also appears in Gnostic systems of the early Christian era, and was further developed by the theologian Valentinus (ca. 160 AD)...." [Wikipedia, Ogdoad]

"...The Ogdoad, again, was shown as follows:— They affirm that man was formed on the eighth day..." [Roman Catholic Fathers of the Church; Against Heresis (St. Ireneus); Book I, Chapter 18, section 2]

"...a work "On the Ogdoad", probably against the Ogdoad of Valentinus the Gnostic, written for the same priest Florinus, who had gone over to the sect of the Valentinians (fragment in Eusebius);..." [Roman Catholic Encyclopedia, section "I"; St. Irenaus]

"...In the Epistle of Barnabas (xv) we read: "Wherefore, also, we keep the eight day..." [Roman Catholic Encyclopedia, section "S"; Sunday]

This 'Eighth day' is Gnostic.

God instead "...rested the 7th Day...", in Creation and in the Tomb.

 

[Second Phoenix]

The "8th day" theology is Gnostic Ogdoad... not Christian.

You are comparing the eighth day belief in the creation of man by a particular school of Gnostics, which warped Christianity, to the early Christian concept that Christ was risen on the eighth day - the completion of the world. That is, from the Jewish concept of ages and the days of the creation of the world, followed by its completion on the metaphorical 'eighth day', that is, the resurrection.

[/quote]"...The concept of an Ogdoad also appears in Gnostic systems of the early Christian era, and was further developed by the theologian Valentinus (ca. 160 AD)...." [Wikipedia, Ogdoad][/quote]

That's on wikipedia, yes. It doesn't relate here.

"...The Ogdoad, again, was shown as follows:— They affirm that man was formed on the eighth day..." [Roman Catholic Fathers of the Church; Against Heresis (St. Ireneus); Book I, Chapter 18, section 2]

You can just say, Against Heresies. The belief that Christ was the eighth day or risen on the eighth day has nothing to do with the belief that man was created on the eighth day.

"...a work "On the Ogdoad", probably against the Ogdoad of Valentinus the Gnostic, written for the same priest Florinus, who had gone over to the sect of the Valentinians (fragment in Eusebius);..." [Roman Catholic Encyclopedia, section "I"; St. Irenaus]

Do you understand logic, or do you just make connections because one thing says a number and then you associate it with a totally different concept because it has the same number?

"...In the Epistle of Barnabas (xv) we read: "Wherefore, also, we keep the eight day..." [Roman Catholic Encyclopedia, section "S"; Sunday]

This 'Eighth day' is Gnostic.

What eighth day? The eighth day of Christ or the creation of people? Because those are two totally different things. Eight dollars is different than eight goats.

Why not say the '23rd' is a heretical concept? The 23rd what, exactly?

The Beast had seven heads and ten horns.
So is 'seven' and ten an evil number?

Is this SDA math-mythology? Just compare numbers until something lines up?

 

[Leuko Petra]

You are comparing the eighth day belief in the creation of man by a particular school of Gnostics, which warped Christianity, to the early Christian concept that Christ was risen on the eighth day - the completion of the world. That is, from the Jewish concept of ages and the days of the creation of the world, followed by its completion on the metaphorical 'eighth day', that is, the resurrection...

That is exactly the setting forth of the Gnostic Ogdoad...

"...for the eighth day... I will endeavour to set it forth. That He might re-create that Adam by means of the week...that on the same day He rose again from the dead, on which He created light?..." [Roman Catholic Online Fathers of the Church; On The Creation Of The World (Victorinus), sections throughout] - CHURCH FATHERS: On the Creation of the World (Victorinus)

 

[Second Phoenix]

That is exactly the setting forth of the Gnostic Ogdoad...

"...for the eighth day... I will endeavour to set it forth. That He might re-create that Adam by means of the week...that on the same day He rose again from the dead, on which He created light?..." [Roman Catholic Online Fathers of the Church; On The Creation Of The World (Victorinus), sections throughout] - CHURCH FATHERS: On the Creation of the World (Victorinus)

Are you saying that what Christ accomplished did nothing for humanity?