It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Francisco Ribera (1537–1591)
In order to remove the papacy of the Catholic Church from consideration as the Antichrist (as an act of countering the Protestant Reformation), Ribera began writing a lengthy (500 page) commentary in 1585 on the Book of Revelation (Apocalypse) titled In Sacrum Beati Ioannis Apostoli, & Evangelistiae Apocalypsin Commentarij, proposing that the first few chapters of the Apocalypse apply to ancient pagan Rome, and the rest he limited to a yet future period of 3½ literal years, immediately prior to the second coming. During that time, the Roman Catholic Church would have fallen away from the pope into apostasy because of the Reformation cry stating that "the papacy is the seat of the true and real Antichrist." (Martin Luther, Aug. 18, 1520). Then, he proposed, the Antichrist, a single individual, would:
Persecute and blaspheme the saints of God.
Rebuild the temple in Jerusalem.
Abolish the Christian religion.
Deny Jesus Christ.
Be received by the Jews.
Pretend to be God.
Kill the two witnesses of God.
Conquer the world.
To accomplish this, Ribera proposed that the 1260 days and 42 months and 3½ times of prophecy were not 1260 years as based on the year-day principle (Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:6), but a literal 3½ years, hence preventing the arrival of the deduction of (i) the 1260 years to be related to the Dark Ages (according to the Historicism (Christianity) interpretation of eschatology from 538 A.D. when the papal power was fully established in Rome until its political blow in 1798 A.D., when Louis-Alexandre Berthier the general of Napoleon captured pope Pius VI as prisoner to Valence, France) and (ii) the Antichrist to be related to papacy.
Originally posted by defcon5
In reality, I believe that the prophecy of Daniel, which futurists point to as being the peace treaty, is an intentional misinterpretation by Ribera
Originally posted by kennethmd
It should not really matter when Jesus will return. What matter, is you all should be prepared and ready for his return, so he can except you in his father kingdom.
The Bible never mention that Babylon is a nation, it mention it as the capital city of the anti-Christ. His empire is eight empire, which consist of the territory of the first six empires that had rule over Israel and control it people, plus the territory of the 7th empire that will rule over Israel and control it people. Babylon will be the capital of the eight empire.
Here's a clue for you all. The seals are seven years each. The trumpets are 42 months each, three and a half years. The bowls are 6 months each. Y'all should know that three seals had already been broken.
I didn't mention about a time period. I give the clue that the events in Revelation take place in order, not point of view like most people.
Originally posted by DISRAELI
Originally posted by kennethmd
It should not really matter when Jesus will return. What matter, is you all should be prepared and ready for his return, so he can except you in his father kingdom.
Absolutely right. I could not agree more.
The Bible never mention that Babylon is a nation, it mention it as the capital city of the anti-Christ. His empire is eight empire, which consist of the territory of the first six empires that had rule over Israel and control it people, plus the territory of the 7th empire that will rule over Israel and control it people. Babylon will be the capital of the eight empire.
I would be reluctant to identify Babylon in such detail.
To me, the important points about Babylon and Rome are that each, in their time, are
a) World-dominant
b) Hostile to the Biblical faith.
So I see them as models for some similar power.
Here's a clue for you all. The seals are seven years each. The trumpets are 42 months each, three and a half years. The bowls are 6 months each. Y'all should know that three seals had already been broken.
Oh dear. We agreed that date-calculating was unnecessary, and now you're falling into it.
This paragraph illustrates how problematic such calculations are, because each of the first three statements are disputable.
As for the first three seals being broken; my own view of Revelation ch6 is that the first four seals, the "Four Horsemen", come in close proximity as aspects of one major time of catastrophe, which we haven't seen yet.
I've done two threads on the subject, one describing their purpose, and the other trying to envisage what the experience would look like.
edit on 22-4-2012 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by DISRAELI
I see Revelation as a description of future events, where the labels describing the time-periods are not meant for calculation..
Originally posted by DISRAELI
That theory builds on a verse where the king "makes covenant with many".
But a covenant, whether it be between humans or between God and the corporate Israel, is normally between two parties.
Matthew 27:51
And, behold, the veil of the temple was rent in two from the top to the bottom; and the earth did quake, and the rocks rent;
Tabernacle
The Holy of Holies was hidden by a veil, and no one was permitted to enter except the High Priest, and even he could only enter once a year on the Day of Atonement, to offer the blood of sacrifice and incense before the mercy seat.
Luke 21:24
And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.
John Westley's Explanatory Notes
Out of the earth — Out of Asia. But he is not yet come, though he cannot be far off for he is to appear at the end of the forty-two months of the first beast.
Originally posted by DISRAELI
It's a little difficult to stretch "being based on same kind of law" into "causing to worship", especially since the refusal to worship is the reason for martydom.
Originally posted by DISRAELI
If you make those identifications, you've got to think of some reason why a Christian refusal to give worship to Rome should cause the United States government to execute them.
Originally posted by DISRAELI
The reason for the executions was refusal to sacrifice to the Emperor, who was really just a front man for the Empire as an object of worship- in other words, the Empire was worshiping itself in these sacrifices.
I look for something following the same model.
Originally posted by DISRAELI
the way you're reading the symbols at the moment is that the United States is potentially putting Christians to death for refusing to worship the Papacy.
Originally posted by defcon5
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.
I should also point out where the title of Pope comes from.
Did you know that it is from the title Pontifex Maximus, which is where we get “holy pontiff” from.
The first Pontiff was not Peter as the RCC claims, but actually Damasus I, and before him the title was held by some of the most evil men on the planet. Men including Nero and Caligula.
So are you saying that the roman emperors were slowly transformed through time and became the popes? if so,thats "very" interesting and both of them had the same type of iron grasp upon society and held the same kind of power and sway over the world they lived in...edit on 22-4-2012 by blocula because: (no reason given)extra DIV