www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Scripture and Patristic Writings Reincarnation of Elias?

Dear RayK,

As long as you didn't take offense, then we're cool!

But I do think if you commented on the Mystery of the Trinity, I just might come away thinking it to be more of a Mystery than before . . .

Alex

Ray,

I actually found this to be the most persuasive arena of your primary post. If the Antichrist was alive when John was, how can he be alive now, or in the future?

My only problem is that your interpretation puts a completely different spin on the Apocalypse than I've ever heard before: Catholic, Orthodox, or Protestant alike. What is one to do with this? If the chronological order is wrong, or improbable, in your opinion, what takes the place of it? I know you touched on this in your first post, but could you elaborate as to how you view the Apocalypse?

Logos Teen

Mmmm� it is most difficult to lay out the Apostasis of John, I can do it but it will sound like gibberish to you. Much knowledge of Jewish way of the time come to bare. Thirty years of study cannot be condensed into a short message - But here goes - and I will offer you a link to the absolute best explanation of the book - later.

We call it the book of Revelations - its original name in Greek is The Book of Apostasies (I may be using the wrong word) but in any event the Greek name of the book means - �the restoration of all things�.

To the Jew - the name of a thing was very important. The name - contained the essence of the thing. And that is why, when Jesus changes Simon�s name to Peter - to the Jew this implies that the essence of the man had been changed. God (Jesus and his father) changed something about the essence (very soul) of Simon. But this is not important.

The name of any Jewish book worked in a particular way. The best way to see this is to go at it - backwards as it had a �telescoping� like effect (or one might think of the Russian dolls which look like eggs and are one inside the other while each looks exactly the same). The literary habit was that the subject of the entire book was summarized in the first section of the book - which was in turn summarized in the first few sentences (today we might say the first paragraph) - which in turn was summarized in the very first sentence - which in turn was used as the name of the book or sometimes made into a short hand like nick-name for the book in one or two words. For example let us look at the gospel of Matthew - - - (and stick close to the original Greek by a transliteration where possible)

�The book of the generation of Jesus Christ son of David son of Abraham.�

Right away - we can tell that the main subject of the book is this man Jesus - who is of the genealogical line of David and David is of the genealogical line of Abraham. Obviously Abraham came first - so - in the typical Jewish way of using modifiers - read it backwards. From Abraham came David and from David came the son of David who is the messiah (Christ) and whose name is Jesus. The subject of this book will be - the generation of Jesus the messiah the son of David�.

And what Matthew has named there - is an official title - Son of David. You will remember that several times in this particular gospel Jesus is addressed as �Son of David�.

The title �Son of David� as it originated with King David - is given to only one son from among many sons. It is an official title (similar to Son of Pharaoh given to Moses) which title indicated that the son to which it was assigned - would become the next king. The sons of Jewish kings were called princes - so this designated one prince above all other princes. Common belief is that the genealogy which follows is a genealogy of first born sons by way of time�. However the genealogy given is a trace of appointed Son�s of David (which appointed son may or may not be the first born in time sequence). Skipping over from Abraham to David (to save space) - look at David - transliterated it says �and Jesse generated the-one David the King, and David generated the-one Solomon out-of the one who had been the wife of Uriah, and Solomon �� � Stop there.

Notice, Nathan was the first born son in time to David and Solomon was the tenth born son by way of time. So it is not a genealogy by way of first born son in time - but by way of of the line of those appointed to the office of - Son of David. Now you will also notice that sometimes the proper son is designated (the king many have several sons with the same name) by way of the mother.

Here is how it works.

Israel had a King - the King has several wives. The king has several sons by all his wives. All the sons are princes of Israel. The King had a queen who also has a throne that sits beside the king�s throne - but the queen is not the wife of the king - it is the kings mother (like most nations of that time). She is called the Queen Mother - and she is the mother of the king.

The king - would appoint one of his sons to ascend the throne after his death or if he steps down due to health reasons. Since any future king of Israel (after David) must be of the Davidic line - each King to ascend the throne must previously have the title - Son of David. � meaning THE one son out of all other sons - who is of the same mind as the king - the son �after his own image� would be the Jewish way to put it.

That Son, was either directly appointed by the King - or - appointed through his mother (meaning it was the king�s desire that this favored wife become the next queen and her son named so-and-so would be the next king). And that is why some of the names of a Son of David in the trace Matthew gives - is identified through a Queen Mother. By the trace doing that (naming the son by way of the mother) we may assume that Betsheba (I think that was Uriah�s wife�s name) was David�s favored wife and it was appointed that she would be the next Queen (after the death of the king) and through her appointment as the next Queen Mother it was a given that her son would be the one to ascend the throne of the king.

In the case of a Son of David not being able to assend the throne (plenty of times in Israel�s history some non-Davidic would violently take for himself the throne) then it was up to the current Son of David to appoint the next Son of David so on and so on for the day that the Davidic line returned to the throne.

So the trace of generation that Matthew gives - is a trace of the line of all those males of the line of David who had been appointed and held the office and title of - Son of David. And Matthew intends to show his Jewish readers - that the legitimate line of the Son Of David - came down to Jesus through his legal father Joseph the husband of Mary. Matthew displays that Jesus was the legitimate Son of David and therefore was the only legitimate heir to the throne of David - and the only legitimate King that Israel could have.

Now - let us return to the opening line.

�The book of the generation of Jesus Christ son of David son of Abraham.�

By showing this �telescoping� like nature to the form of a Jewish book - and by working our way back from the first section (the trace) to the first few lines - and then right back to the first sentence ��The book of the generation of Jesus Christ son of David son of Abraham.� And now we know the name of the book �The generation of Jesus the messiah - the Son of David� and we know that the main subject of Matthew�s book will be Jesus - as the Son of David and the only legitimate King of the nation of Israel. Matthew focuses particularly upon Jesus as the legitimate Son of David (Herod was not a legitimate king) - which sits upon the Davidic throne of the Jewish people - forever (due to his resurrection within which he shall not die) - Jesus remains the King of the Jews forever and every Jew owes him their allegiance as their king. So when we read Matthew and see Jesus through Matthews eyes we should always be looking to put Jesus in the context of the legitimate Son of David who ascend the throne to become Israel�s only King.

Now you see something regarding the form and structure of a Jewish book.

John, being a Jew - follows that same structure when he writes his vision .

Let us go over it one more time in a different image.

The Russian �nesting� dolls offer us a good image.
http://www.therussianstore.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=products.search&cat_id=13

The entire body of the book - shall be the exact same thing or subject - as the first section of the book - which first section is the same exact thing and subject (spoken of from a little different perspective) as the first few lines (paragraph to us) - which will be the same exact thing and subject of the very first line - which very first line is itself the name of the book.

Do you see - this - nesting?? This method of �unfolding� the book which ancient Jews used?

In a very real way you can say that the arrangement and structure of a Jewish book of this type of literature - repeats the same subject - in four ways.

The first sentence (the name of the book)
The prolog (the first few sentences which is usually three or four but may be longer )
The first section
And then the body of the book.

Here is the form which shows how the one theme and subject is repeated.
- - - - - -
The first sentence and name of the book = The first development of the theme and subject

The prolog = the second development of the theme and subject of the book.

The first section = the third development of the same theme and subject

The body = the fourth development of the same theme and subject.
-----------

Matthew follows this structure - but you could miss that because the trace of the line of the Son�s of David is long. The body of the book begins with �Now when Jesus was born (generated) in Bethlehem of Judea�� which begins the narrative style (the body of the book).

All Jewish books of scripture follow this method (personal letters and historical records follow it in a loser manner).

And now you know how to divide the Book of Revelations into the first sentence (its name) and prolog - then first section - and then the body (the four visions) - and you know that each potion will be a repetition under widened details and imagery. Rather than reading it as a chronological order from start to finish - we know that it will repeat the same thing in four different (and progressively wider) ways.

Professor Euginio Corsini (deceased) was totally unaware of the findings of my study (I stayed within OT books) - and - with his own study of John�s book he recognized and followed that same structure to be in John�s book called Revelations.

To make a long story short (too late!!) the book of �the restoration of all things� traces the history of the world from Adam (the fall) to Jesus (the restoration) and it culminates with the historical event of the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Of course - John�s book is a Jewish book and so it uses the prophetic imagery of the Old Testament (Genesis, Daniel, Ezekiel, etc..) that deal with the coming of the Son of Man - his crucifixion, death, and resurrection.

In my next post I will begin to show this to you - and take Revelations out of a millenarian interpretation - and try to let you see that John parreles the coming of Jesus Christ to the Jewish nation in history with our own progress in the spiritual life which culminates in the mystical marriage. Well - actually - John does not draw the parallel - God does.

In the sense of history, or time, or past and future - John talks about nothing further than the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Revelations does not �predict� anything beyond that nor does it predict Christ coming a second time in any other way than within the mystical marriage of the saints - where the saint is totally united to the crucified and risen Jesus Christ who is alive and here even now.

-ray

Brother Ray,

Very interesting post and await the next.

james

James - it would help if I gave you Corsini's URL
http://www.thegenesisletters.com/PrivateLibrary/Corsini/Corsini.htm

The key to scriptures - is Providence.

Providence is the doctrine that all things are brought to be-ing by God and totally governed by him.

"In the beginning was the Logos (word) and the Logos was with God and the Logos was God... all things came to be through him and without him not one thing comes to be."

Logos - it means the reason, the pattern, the cause. It is not a dead thing. To make a comparison with yourself - it is like the power of your reasoning mind by which you decided how you will go about accomplishing some task. And a bit more.

To the Jewish mind of the time, not only were physical or material things - things - but events and such as height, weight etc.. and those properties which we attribute to - things. IN other words - everything about creation - is considered a - thing. In fact, the Hebrew word used to describe (in Genesis) God bringing the world into be-ing - is that God �thing-ed� creation.

And the word that we translate above as �In the beginning..� actually does not mean the beginning of a time sequence - it means - a foundation - an essence - a first principle. It also means the pure ideal (as for example someone wins first place in a beauty contest). It also means first-fruits which is the prime pattern of all others.

In other words - the foundation - of - now. .. This very moment.

Without understanding the doctrine of Providence, reading the scriptures is like - watching a play and then going out to make a phone call every time the main character comes on stage. Providence is God using every event that comes to us every day (our daily bread) - sometimes gently - sometimes like a hammer - in order to form us through - experiences. Some people think God tries to teach us and we must learn rules and how to act etc.. and we must modify our behavior (so religion becomes a psychological therapy) - but that is not the case. Our minds are limited. We are only human. Our minds cannot hold - all that God wishes to give us. A man does not raise to God (build for himself some type of mental ladder) through the use of his intelligence. If that were the case then only the most intelligent would attain heaven - do you think that is the way it works? Of course not. The only thing we have to learn is the very little we need to know to cooperate with God - within the situations and circumstances that he brings to us day by day. Jesus called that �doing the Will of my Father.� When we begin that - then we make it easy for God to �let us form man into our own image.� All this is for another time. I only meant to bring to you the importance of our cooperation with Providence.

Back to John�s book.

It is prophetic literature. It is most certainly written in the prophetic form (as I described to you). Despite what the TV may tell you - to be a prophet within the OT and NT - means - to understand the deep things of God. The prophet was not someone who could predict the future (that was rarely done)� his role was the understanding of what was to others - �riddles� . Here is a good example� in the Catholic and Orthodox church - portions of the OT and NT are read - and then the priest explains the text and applies it to our lives. Perhaps the priest explains some parable that Jesus spoke. THIS - is what prophecy is. It is understanding the symbols and spiritual meaning. God often uses symbols to speak to us. Was not Jesus God? And did not he often speak in symbolic parable? This is clear. The prophet - was not just someone who was walking in the field one day and some brilliant light flashed and �pop� now you are a prophet (I may deal with Saul on another day). No. There existed schools of prophets� communities .. Where the would be prophet was educated in scriptures and the meaning of scriptures - and where he lived an asetic life. The mind and the spirit were trained - educated - and not all would be disciples became prophets. And - some prophets sold out - and would only tell the King what the king wanted to hear and hold back the �hard� stuff.

You can read some of the Dead Sea Scrolls to see how this works. In some of the scrolls - the scriptural passes is quoted - and then the teacher explains the meaning and the spirit of the passage - applying it to his time. Since the beginning of the Catholic church - when rites and ceremonies began to be organized - the Liturgy has included the literal reading of �the word� followed by it spiritual explanation.

At this point I would point you to read Corsini�s book, which I gave you the URL for. My own explanation must be short with little detail. I will only give you a few highlights which Corsini did not get into or did not see - and these will aid you much - if you read him.

The first key to reading it. It is - a Jewish work. Its meaning and use of symbols comes entirely from the Old Testament and the history of Israel. To think �what would this symbol mean to me??� is entirely the wrong way to go - you must think �what would this symbol mean to a Jew of 2500 years ago??�

I must skip over much.

�Greetings from him who was, who is, and who is to come.� would call to mind the name that God gave to Moses for himself. We translate that name as simply �I am� - but it is much wider and can also be translated as �was, is, shall be� and it is used in just that way by such as Daniel and Ezekiel - as a name of God. In a short way - this line means �greeting to you from the God of Moses� (keep in mind John is writing for Jews).

�Behold, He is coming amidst the clouds, and every eye shall see him, even those who pierced him..�

The symbol of the �cloud� is well used by prophets. It signifies - mystery - something that can not be known. To the Jew - it harkens back to the Exodus from Egypt - when the Presence of God was invisibly within the �cloud of smoke� by day and the pillar of fire by night. The Hebrew words actually means a dark cloud like a stom could - lighted up from inside as if by lightening. It is the same �cloud� which settled upon Mt Sinai - into which Moses whet - to speak with God face to face. And when the NT says that Jesus was �taken up by a cloud� or shall �come on the clouds of heaven� - to the Jew - this would mean that the �cloud� Jesus was taken into was the very same - Presence - that settled upon Sinia - and that hovered above the seat of the ARK - and which yearly descended into the Holy of Holies during the act of Atonement - in other word - the mysterious Presence of the God of Moses. Often called �shekinah� in Hebrew. And to say that Jesus will come within the clouds - is to also say that Jesus is united to the holy Presence of the God os Moses. By the way - the mysterious cloud - was also understood to be the presence of God - as Providence - that led Israel out of Egypt.

In any case - John immediately identifies Jesus as the same as - the God Moses spoke face to face with.

�And every eye shall see him� - the eye - is �the lamp of the body�. It is that which enlightens the mind and is the gateway of - knowing. �even those who pierced him� shall see him coming on the cloud (shekinah). This whole line simply states that every human of all times - will come to understand and have direct knowledge that Jesus - is God. Some, who would take this literally and in a non-Jewish way - would imagine that these eyes are physical - and sine those who pierced him are long dead - they must be resurrected before Jesus physically comes again into history - and that is non-sense. It is not what John is saying.

�I am the Alpha (the beginning or forundation and Logos of creation) and the Omega (the end and most manefest of creation). Again - do not think of this in time sequence (John already removed that when he said - who was - is - and shall be - think of this from the inside to the outside. Think of this as where creation (this moment right now) springs out from God�s mind - and - be-comes - that which we experience.

When we are children we think of God making creation and setting it into motion to merrily go alone by itself, by way of its rules and physics - if this be true or not just dispense of that for now because that is not what John is saying.

No-thing of this creation exists in a self-sufficient manner. Everything - comes to-be - at every moment. If God ceased to �think� that tree into existence for a split second - that tree would no longer - be. And so it is also with you. God is united to your essence (theology calls this the essential union). THAT - is the beginning - the foundation - of you. Your body and its actions are built upon that.

John then goes on to describe the vision he had. What he describes is a Son of Man (human body generated from human fleash) standing within the Holy of Holies - dressed in the ritual dress of the High Priest - who is in the midst of performing the service of the Day of Atonement - which was the Highest act of the Jewish Temple. It was performed at the close of Passover.

During Passover - the lambs were slaughtered. Imagine how many??!! Tens of thousands.

To keep things moving - there was a line of men with carrying lambs on their shoulders. As the line moved up - the lamb was taken by two priest to the altar in the court yard - its neck was slashed and the blood gathered in a brass bowl. Hand over hand - this bowel was passed down a line of priests - and then given to the High Priest - who - alone - would enter the holy of holies and sprinkle a bit on the floor and throw the rest upon the Ark. Then the empty bowel was passed back - hand over hand - to be refilled by the next.

We should probably think that for practical reasons - the amount of blood put into the bowel from each lamb was probably small - and one bowel would have the blood of several lambs in it. Perhaps it was only one drop from each lamb - all gathered until the bowel was filled - and then the High Priest would perhaps dip something into the mix and just sprinkle a bit on the floor and a bit on the Ark - and this would fulfill the letter of the law.

In any case - the figure in John�s vision - is in the midst of doing - just that - he (Jesus) is acting as the High Priest on the day of Atonement - who is in the vary act of throwing the blood of the lamb (his own) upon the Ark of the Covenant. What is very significant - is that the scene John is seeing in vision - would have been the exact thing that was taking place within the Holy of Holies on the very day of the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus (remember - the curtain of the Holy of Holies was torn - so that - for the first time ever - you could look into the Holy of Holies! And what could be seen? Well - while Jesus is outside dying on the cross - Jesus is also inside the Holy of Holies performing the act of the High Priest - throwing the blood of the lamb (his own) onto the Ark in Atonement for all the sins of Israel.

John (or better said - the God of Moses through the vision) is telling us that both acts (Jesus on the cross and Jesus the High Priest making Atonement) are the exact same thing. THIS - is what a Jewish reading at the time of John would get from reading this part. It would - stick out like a sore thumb. It would �rock his world� so to speak. It was - shocking - to say the least - and a bold proclamation. If it was not true - it was blasphemy.

This, the first section (sometimes wrongly called the first vision) comprises - the whole - yes the whole - of the content of the book. From now on out - what will be told - is this same act - in several different ways and under several variation of details - becoming �wider� each time - and more �sensate� (meaning less and less spiritual in imagery and more and more like history as we know it).

You say �huh? But there are more visions?

Letters,
Seals,
Trumpets,
Bowels.

Letters - that which is written. Letters sent by God = the Words of God. = scriptures = the prophecy of the coming of the Son of Man.

Seals - wax seals on the letters. The seal of the King. Meaning no one may �open� scriptures - unless God opens them. The scriptures (which tell of the coming of the Son of Man) remain sealed from human understanding - Jesus (the Holy Spirit) is the only one who may open them and tell their true meaning.

Trumpets = the trumpets of Israel were used in only two ways. As a call to assemble for war - and to announce the immediate presence - of the King.

Bowels - I have already described for you the brass bowels used to pour out the blood of the lamb within the Holy of Holies. And you will see in that particular vision that is exactly what they are used for - to pour out blood.

You will note that the actions which accompany the pouring out of the last bowel - (earth quakes, rising of the dead, darkness etc..) are the exact same actions that accompany Jesus�s death on the cross. Because that is exactly what it describes. The decent of the New Jerusalem - is the Resurrection of Jesus and the fact (it had not existed before this act) of the establishment of his new Church .

This is about all I can do in such a short space. If you read Corsini - you will have wonderful explanation and details taken from the prophecies of the Old Testament.

-ray

The book is out of print and impossible to get (you can try) and I have it posted by permission of the publisher as long as it is for private study. You may read it, print it, but you can not post it or give it to anyone. Thanks.

Thanks very much, Ray. I know you spent a lot of time compiling that (at least it seems like it!). Your view of the Apocalypse are incredibly interesting. Thank you for Corsini's link.

I have a couple of more questions, but I'll give you a chance to breathe first!

OK, I'll ask them now and you can take a long as you'd like answering them. Sorry for my inquisitiveness!

1) By your interpretation is there a denial of the actual Second Coming of Christ? How can there be, if this is established Christian dogma?

2) It seems that only a few people understand the Apocalypse as you do. What kind of ramifications does this hold for the Christian body at large, if basically 99.9% of Christians believe many of the things in Revelation to be in the past, present, and future? We believe in the literal Second Coming of Christ, but you seem not to. Am I understanding you correctly?

Thanks and God bless.

Logos Teen

Thank you Ray for sharing your rendering, I will visit your link and hopefully I will be able to comment with some understanding ( of course with some assistance from the Holy Spirit ).

James

Let us be totally honest - what are you asking me to believe in - when you say �Second Coming.�?

The interpretations are so widely varied - that no one knows what is supposed to really happen, trhe images of Revelations are interpreted several ways over the centuries (when one date passes then we must shift the meaning of the symbols) no one knows when and know one knows - how.

So the question �is there a denial of the Second Coming� is not only loaded (I must guess your particular belief set) but there is nothing solid to for anyone to say they believe in.

I do not believe in a millenarian like Second Coming (a literal fulfillment of Revelations) such as it is commonly expressed. I have given you links to documents of the Catholic and Orthodox church that show that such an interpretation had been condemned as false long ago.

With the death of the last apostle (who saw him and spoke with him in the flesh and with him as Resurrected) - all revelation of him was closed. Complete. Nothing is lacking - nothing more to be revealed to the history books and man�s normal every day human experience. Jesus will never again come and address the crowds and there is no prophecy in either the OT (all of them were fulfilled) - or the News Testament - about any further public appearance of Jesus Christ.

Ahh.. So you point to Matthew 24 �so what will be the signs of your coming?� and I can prove to you that Jesus answers them by telling them what will be the signs surrounding his own arrest, trial, and crucifixion, and then goes on to tell the apostles that they will be persecuted and dragged to witness before kings - because Jesus considered the moments of his death and resurrection to be - his - �coming� and to be THE event in which God the Father would reveal to the world the Son of Man promised for centuries in Jewish scriptures. Read it and listen to the signs Jesus tells will accompany his period of tribulation� he even says half way through as he speaks of his own death as �the end� - - - - �You shall hear about wars and rumors of wars, do not be alarmed or terrified, these rumors must come first, but the end is not yet.� And what is he talking about? You have to know the context of the gospels to know this. The scriptures are NOT intended to stand - alone. He is talking about the fact that he would be arrested as a revolutionary who was doing sedition in order overthrow the Roman occupation and crown himself as king. And the �real end� - is his own death after the trial. And then after describing what the apostles would go through as they spread the gospel - Jesus tells them �Whoever (he is speaking to his apostles) endures (in faith that Jesus is God) to the end (their own death) will be saved.�

Never once does Jesus say of himself that he would come a second time at a later date. What he does say (in the Greek) is �when you see me again� and each time he says this he is speaking of a personal event where the one he is speaking to shall then see and understand with a direct knowledge - that Jesus is God. He describes this as them experiencing him �in glory� *his spiritualized and Resurrected body) and upon the clouds (the mysterious presence of God) of heaven.


All prophecies of him within the OT are fulfilled and completed with his crucifixion and resurrection.

So exactly what is this event by which we will either see him for the first time - like others who actually spoke with his humanity would �see me again�??

It is certainly NOT a Second Coming because by calling it a Second coming - that is comparing it to be like a - First Coming - and Jesus himself considered his �first coming� to be the event of his death and resurrection. And it shall not be like the first which was a public visit into history (born of the virgin, selected apostles, crucified and died).

We - as individuals - who are alive now and never saw his human flesh of 2000 years ago - we will see him for the first time (he is present in the Eucharist but we do not see him) either in the mystical marriage or with the Judgment at the moments of dead. This is sound church doctrine. Period. As John said �All eyes will see him� which of course does not mean we will see him with our physical eyes but means we will experience him and understand without question that Jesus is the Son of Man and God.

If I have said anything at all that interets you - you needed read any of my own papers but you should rather obtain a copy of Abandonment To Divine Providence -
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/A...68/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_1/102-2433442-7192108
and sit down and read and do what it tells you to do.

Here are my notes on Matthew 24
http://www.thegenesisletters.com/Letters/Matthew24.htm

Believe me - what I am saying is nothing new - it is a restoration - to what the church has always taught . I am just brushing away the barnacles.

The pity is - that by putting off the visitation of Jesus to some far off time in history - that erases from people the immediacy of working toward the mystical marriage within your own life time. It makes dry and lifeless - any idea that Providence is daily directed by Jesus himself and our daily cooperation is needed. When the possibility of being united to an experience of Jesus Christ - in this life time - is removed - then the daily actions of Providence are make null and void. Instead - we just wait with anxiety that when we die - Jesus may have mercy on us and admit us into heaven� but yet we shall be coming to him with empty hands because we would have ignored him every day and have attributed all events in our life to chance, our own planning, the deceits or rewards of others, laws, physics, math - anything other than - God.

I am not a theologian and this is just a discussion.

-ray

Thank you, Ray. It's all very interesting.

Let me be more specific. If Christ isn't coming again, how do you square this with what the Catechsim says?

Logos Teen

No, the current procedures don't allow for it until 50 years after the departure of a saint, and Pope Kyrollos departed in 1971, so he can't be canonized until 2021. There's really absolutelly no doubt that he will be cannonized then though. In fact a church near me will chage it's name from the Church of St. Menas to the Church of St. Menas and St. Kyrollos the moment he's cannonized. He's apreared to literally thousands of people, and worked many, many miracles.

Dear Logos Teen...

You will have even more questions than this. What you are missing (because no one has given it to you) is a bit of knowledge about the stages of the mystical life - the Purgative stage, the Illuminative stage, and the Unitive stage which culminates in the mystical marriage.

You are not the only Christian lacking this knowledge. Ask almost any priest "what are the three stages of the mystical life? What is the doctrine of Providence? What is the mystical marriage?" and they will not be able to tell you. They may mumble "that is something called mystical therology and I do not know it" And if you find a priest that does know - sit down with him and listen carefully.

Or go read the Doctor's of The Church - Saint John of the Cross, St Catherine of Siena� St. John of the Cross - this is the ONLY thing he writes about!

Without knowing anything about the stages of the mystical life - you have no real context for what you are reading - and you are assuming a literal context (like most people do).

I cannot answer all your questions. But I will point out a few things to you about what you ask and what your quoted.

Rev 22:16 (as mentioned in your quote) go read it - - -

�The Spirit and the bride say �Come� - Let all hearers say �Come��

The groom is God and the bride is the individual member of the church through out all time. It is as if to say �You who hear these visions - come - become a bride - and come to the mystical marriage�
http://www.digiserve.com/mystic/Christian/resources/prayer/Teresa/spiritual_marriage.html

Bride - groom - marriage - get it? The mystical marriage. So what does that tell you that Revelations is about? = The mystical marriage.

I did write to you that Revelations describes under Old Testament imagery the coming of Jesus to the Jews and his crucifixion and Resurrection and that it parallels that event to the spiritual life of the individual on up to the mystical marriage.
http://www.digiserve.com/mystic/Christian/resources/prayer/Teresa/spiritual_marriage.html

Whenever you read the word �church� used like this in this type of thing - the church is = individual member of the church (you and I) and all individual members of the church over all time - as a collective group. While those in the past are physically dead Jesus considered them spiritualy still alive "having life" - From Peter and Paul - to Stephan - on down the centuries to you and I and all who may come after us.

Whenever you read the word glory or glorious used in this way �come in glory� or �glorious return� etc.. this means his resurrected presence (the resurrected body of Christ no longer has any physical limitation or material attributes - your human senses cannot touch - see - feel - or experience it once it had ascended into heaven ) if someone said to you �Oh, the Second Coming has happened - Jesus is over here - or over there �� don�t believe them - it is a spiritual event that will have no physical attributes and it cannot be experienced with the senses of your human body. No date can be given to it because it is not a physical event or an even in history - it will not happen on a certain date in history because it must happen to every member of the church (Peter, Paul, John, you, me, many yet to come�) if we strive for it it will happened before our death and it will certainly happen to everyone at the moment of death.

Also re-read what you quoted concerning the Anti-Christ - it is not a man - it is an �ism� like Communism, Americanism, Capitalism� it is a set of beliefs - a mind set - that any man and all men have from time to time. It is a spirit (an experience of the mind).

Revelations will continue to seem to you to be describing a literal and physical like Second Coming of Christ instead of the mystical marriage and judgments at the moment of death (�the next time you see me..� - until you know something about the stages of the spiritual life which culminate in the mystical marriage.

OK.. That is all I can do for you. You need to read up on the spiritual life and its stages.

Ray,

Christ is in our Midst!

While I find much of your discussion very interesting, I am still left with a few questions.

First, what then do you make of the Byzantine Liturgy, which during the anamnesis/"Thine own of Thine own" states: "the cross, the tomb, the resurrection on the third day, the ascension into heaven, the sitting at the Right Hand, and the second and awesome coming..."? The priest speaks from the a-temporal perspective of liturgy/heaven and compares the second coming with the historical events of Christ's mission and puts it in the same category. The author would be silly to list all these historical events and then jump to a mystiical, non-historical event at the end.

Secondly, why must a mystical interpretation, and for that matter a liturgical interpretation (also very common), necessarily exclude the more historical interpretation that the Byzantine anaphoras seem to take for granted?

Sorry - I had not noticed this last reply.

Yes - the liturgy rolls all this events into - one thing.

What the majority believe and repeat - may have nothing to do with a proper understanding. The church is not a democracy and most of her members are not saints.

Only the Councils and very few other things are guaranteed� and a council condemned a millenarist interpretation of Christ coming again. The �coming� is not within time nor history - yet it will happen and you will experience it.

-ray

Dear Ray

Last night I read some of the links you suggested regarding millenianism. The version of the Second Coming I seem to recall being taught at Catholic school is closest to what one site defined as "amillenianism". If I read it correctly, there is no 1000 years of rule. It is a return of Christ at some point in history with an immediate judging of the "living and the dead", i.e. the General Judgement, where all our sins will be revealed. Then all people will go to their eternal reward or eternal damnation.

I am curious what the other posters were taught in Catholic school or Sunday school.
denise

Dear Ray,

You'll have to forgive me if I have a hard time swallowing it all. Especially in the Byzantine tradition, the liturgy is one of the foremost ways of interpreting Scripture. I have a hard time believing that the texts of the liturgies in the Byzantine, as well as other, churches and much of the traditional quasi-liturgical prayers (e.g. canonical Byzantine prayers for going to sleep) can all have gotten it wrong. I too was taught a version of eschatology that included a historical, physical Second Coming, that was amillenial, and that would seem to be what is taught by the liturgies and the CCC.
We may just have to agree to disagree. I don't think the tradition in any way precludes your interpretation, but the more common interpretation certainly has a venerable tradition to it. God bless.
Justin