Jezebel of Revelation 2 may have been Helena, the wife of Simon Magus

by Damien F. Mackey ‘Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel …’. Here we are told of a New Testament pseudo-prophetess who was either called Jezebel, or who had been given that epithet due to her similarities with the Old Testament’s Queen Jezebel. “The theory that Simon [Magus] was accustomed to borrow from paganism IS CORROBORATED by the assertion of the Fathers that he and Helena were worshipped by their sect with the attributes of ZEUS and ATHENE and received the cult-title ‘Lord’ and ‘Lady’ ….”. Ernest L. Martin There are those who think that the “Jezebel” referred to by St. John the Evangelist in Revelation 2:20-23 was likely the notorious Helena, wife of Simon Magus: ‘Nevertheless, I have this against you: You tolerate that woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophet. By her teaching she misleads my servants into sexual immorality and the eating of food sacrificed to idols. I have given her time to repent of her immorality, but she is unwilling. So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. I will strike her children dead’. Then all the churches will know that I am he who searches hearts and minds, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds’. Thus we read, for example, at: http://www.hwalibrary.com/cgi-bin/get/hwa.cgi?action=getmagazine&InfoID=1389529982 Prostitute Prophetess First, we notice that John says this “Jezebel” called herself a “prophetess” (Rev. 2:20). There must have been a particular false prophetess which had caused God's servants to commit fornication and to eat things sacrificed to idols. By looking on this “Jezebel” as having been contemporaneous with all the heresies of the other Churches — and that these heresies were in reality only ONE false system which originated with Simon Magus — we can then easily see that this “Jezebel” can be equated with the “Female Principle” which Simon introduced into his “Christianity”. None other than Simon's Helen — the reclaimed temple prostitute from Tyre. Helen WAS a prostitute — what better type of person is there who could so expertly “teach” and “seduce My servants to commit fornication," literally as well as spiritually? Simon Magus came in contact with a priestess of Tyre who had been a temple prostitute. The Samaritans worshiped SUCCOTH-BENOTH who was the goddess VENUS. Her devotees continually prostituted themselves. It was their religious duty to do so. This woman was overawed by Simon's demonistic power and was persuaded to follow him — to live with him — to become the female principle, the necessary counterpart to his claim as being a type of male deity. Relative to this, the Encyclopaedia Britannica, vol. 25, p. 126, quoting from Justin [Martyr] states: "And almost all the Samaritans and a few among the other nations, acknowledge and adore him as the first god. And one Helen, who went about with him at the time, who before had had her stand in a brothel, they say was the First Thought that was brought into being by him." This is interesting because Justin was himself a Samaritan — born and reared in the country. He certainly knew his people's native traditions and teachings. What he says agrees exactly with the New Testament revelation of how the Samaritans regarded Simon. They actually called him the "great power of God" (Acts 8:10). It is because of this that they believed him to have creative powers. He himself said he created Helen, his female companion whom he later elevated to a goddess. “Irenaenus, Theodoret, and Epiphanius agree in identifying Simon with the Supreme God and Helena with ennoia, the first conception of his mind and his agent in creation” (Dict. of Religion of Ethics, vol. 11, p. 517). What blasphemy!! But this is what he taught everywhere he went — and under the guise of Christianity. Typically Pagan There always had to be the Man and Woman divinities in paganism. Or, to make it plain, Nimrod and Semiramis. Now notice what the Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics says about this teaching of Simon which he took to Rome and they accepted: “The original of Simon's Helena is the moon-goddess of Syria and Babylonia. In the Clementine Recognitions Helena is always translated ‘Luna’. The theory that Simon was accustomed to borrow from paganism IS CORROBORATED by the assertion of the Fathers that he and Helena were worshipped by their sect with the attributes of ZEUS and ATHENE and received the cult-title ‘Lord’ and ‘Lady’ (i.e. our Lord and our Lady)” (ibid. p. 518). As stated before, it was Simon's plan to bring about a UNIVERSAL religion under the powerful name of Christianity. Remember that Simon NEVER gave up the Christian name. His followers were called Christians. In amalgamating the pagan Babylonian religious beliefs with Christianity, he placed himself at the head — the personification of the chief pagan gods of old, and Helena as his companion in creation, the personification of the female deities. The name Helena for his consort fit his plan exceptionally well. “There existed a wide-spread cult of the moon goddess in Syria and Egypt under the name Helene; she was identified with Aphrodite, Atargatis, and the Egyptian Isis, who was after represented with Horns to betoken her relation to the moon. One feature of the myth of Helen can be traced to the very ancient connection of the religion of Osiris with Syria. According to legend, Isis spent ten years at a brothel in Tyre during the course of her wanderings in search of the scattered limbs of her husband. The imprisonment of Helen (Simon's Helen) is then only a variant of the many myths relating the degradation of the Queen of Heaven” (ibid.). How important these observations are, for Osiris was clearly Nimrod and Isis was Semiramis. Thus, Simon Magus said that he had been the power that motivated Nimrod and that Helen was Semiramis — the Queen of Heaven. Now let us carefully note that Simon brought his "Female Principle" from the City of TYRE. And who was the original Jezebel — the woman who seduced Israel to worship BAAL? She was the daughter of the king of the Sidonians whose capital city was TYRE. (I Kings 16:31). The original Jezebel was also from TYRE. And not only that, Helen claimed herself to be the creation of Simon — that it was Simon who brought her into existence (Ency. Britannica, vol. 25, p. 126). She was, in a sense, the daughter of Simon. But, the original Jezebel WAS THE LITERAL DAUGHTER OF THE KING OF TYRE (I Kings 16:31). [End of quote] For more, see my article: Simon Magus was a Son of Perdition (3) Simon Magus was a Son of Perdition | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu “Jezebel” mirrors the scarlet “woman” “Then the angel carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness. There I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was covered with blasphemous names and had seven heads and ten horns. The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet, and was glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls. She held a golden cup in her hand, filled with abominable things and the filth of her adulteries”. Revelation 17:3-4 Having checked up on the chiastic structure of the Book of Revelation, I was not surprised to find that, at least according to the article, “A Double Chiasm in the Book of Revelation”, Chapter 2, which refers to “Jezebel”, parallels Chapter 17, in which appears the adulteress “woman”. Here is the proposed structure: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/55a05678e4b0bb17f7ab8bc3/t/57ae1b7d9f745636e6381667/1471028094276/Revelation+Double+Chiasm.pdf An Overall Structure of Revelation Prologue (1:1-20) Seven Epistles (2:1-3:22) Seven Seals (4:1-8:1) 144,000 Saints and Seven Trumpets (7:1-111:19) The Two Witnesses (11:1-13) The Woman Clothed with the Sun (12:1) Dragon in Heaven (12:4) Women Flees into the Wilderness (12:6) Satan Cast Out (12:12) Woman Fells into the Wilderness (12:14) Dragon on Earth (12:15) Woman’s Seed Keeps God’s Commands (12:17) The Two Beasts (13:1-18) 144,000 Saints and Seven Angels (14:1-15:4) Seven Bowls (15:1, 5-16:21) Seven Angels: Whore of Babylon vs. New Jerusalem (17:1-22:5) Epilogue (22:6-21) Here is the full text of Chapter 17 (vv. 1-18): One of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, ‘Come, I will show you the punishment of the great prostitute, who sits by many waters. With her the kings of the earth committed adultery, and the inhabitants of the earth were intoxicated with the wine of her adulteries’. Then the angel carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness. There I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast that was covered with blasphemous names and had seven heads and ten horns. The woman was dressed in purple and scarlet, and was glittering with gold, precious stones and pearls. She held a golden cup in her hand, filled with abominable things and the filth of her adulteries. The name written on her forehead was a mystery: BABYLON THE GREAT THE MOTHER OF PROSTITUTES AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH. I saw that the woman was drunk with the blood of God’s holy people, the blood of those who bore testimony to Jesus. When I saw her, I was greatly astonished. Then the angel said to me: ‘Why are you astonished? I will explain to you the mystery of the woman and of the beast she rides, which has the seven heads and ten horns. The beast, which you saw, once was, now is not, and yet will come up out of the Abyss and go to its destruction. The inhabitants of the earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the creation of the world will be astonished when they see the beast, because it once was, now is not, and yet will come. This calls for a mind with wisdom. The seven heads are seven hills on which the woman sits. They are also seven kings. Five have fallen, one is, the other has not yet come; but when he does come, he must remain for only a little while. The beast who once was, and now is not, is an eighth king. He belongs to the seven and is going to his destruction. The ten horns you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but who for one hour will receive authority as kings along with the beast. They have one purpose and will give their power and authority to the beast. They will wage war against the Lamb, but the Lamb will triumph over them because he is Lord of lords and King of kings—and with him will be his called, chosen and faithful followers’. Then the angel said to me, ‘The waters you saw, where the prostitute sits, are peoples, multitudes, nations and languages. The beast and the ten horns you saw will hate the prostitute. They will bring her to ruin and leave her naked; they will eat her flesh and burn her with fire. For God has put it into their hearts to accomplish his purpose by agreeing to hand over to the beast their royal authority, until God’s words are fulfilled. The woman you saw is the great city that rules over the kings of the earth’.

Apocalyptic Apoplexy

by Damien F. Mackey The term “Antichrist” does not occur anywhere in the Book of Apocalypse (Revelation). Saving the ‘Literal’ Level A friend has written, and sent to me the following brief review of a no-doubt fascinating book by Emmet O’Regan, entitled Unveiling the Apocalypse. The Final Passover of the Church (2011): Damien, This is my summary of the book Unveiling the Apocalypse by Emmet O'Regan O'Regan's basic thesis is that many of the events narrated in the Apocalypse have taken place in the 20th century but he also outlines what has not yet taken place and locates fairly exactly where he thinks we are currently positioned. In brief he holds that around 1900 following upon [pope] Leo's vision we had the "unbinding" of Satan after the millennium. On this point, he notes that Augustine had two interpretations of the millennium in The City of God the first of which became largely forgotten. The latter, more common interpretation is that the millennium represents an indeterminate amount of time following the binding of Satan at our Lord's Passion. The other interpretation he proposed is that the millennium stands for the Sabbath millennium i.e towards the end (but not exactly at the end) of six thousand years from creation the unbinding would happen. In his day the Septuagint genealogical interpretation was common which meant that the Sabbath millennium would be around 500AD. It was Bede who calculated 3992 years based on the Hebrew text - since adjusted slightly by others. O'Regan points out that an unbinding of Satan around the time of 1900 fits with the Sabbath millennium. Now O'Regan himself does not hold to a young age for man so he sees this as being of "prophetic" significance rather than literal but he really likes it (whereas I would take it more literally). Now, there has also been interesting new research done by Kevin Symonds in his new book on the St Michael prayer and Leo's vision (which I have already recently read). It turns out saying it happened on October 13th 1884 is one of those made up facts. In fact we don't know a lot for sure about the content of the vision, but Symonds concludes that we can say one took place. The earliest accounts that place a time frame for Satan's period of greater freedom are 50-60 years not the commonly cited 100. O'Regan has a fascinating take on this as one of the accounts of the vision (though we must be cautious) depicts God as saying to Satan that they would "talk later." So for the next sixty years Satan "gathered the nations for war" as it says in the Apocalypse and we had the worst wars humanity has ever seen. O'Regan speculates that around the mid century Satan probably re-bargained for another 50-60 years with a different strategy - a more direct attack on the Church. Hence from 1960 everything has gone up in flames within the Church and Pope Paul himself said the smoke of Satan had entered. This … parallels Job, a type of the Church, who was first attacked Satan by losing all his friends and property. Satan then bargained again and sent an outbreak of sores on Job himself. O'Regan argues that around the years 1999/ 2000 we had the casting down of Satan from heaven (which is the context of the discussion regarding the eclipse). It appears that prior to this final casting out Satan always had some access to the heavenly court in order to accuse humanity of its sins hence "the accuser of our brethren has been cast out". Now, as O'Regan says, the problem most people have is after the year 2000 the situation in the world hardly began to ameliorate itself. Hence such an idea comes across as self evidently incorrect to most (after all it was after that time that homosexual marriage became legalised everywhere etc not to mention the current situation in the Church). O'Regan points out this is what we should expect. For it says in the Apocalypse that upon the casting out of Satan the heavens should rejoice but "woe to the earth" for in his fury at being cast down he lets forth a flood upon the earth against the woman. O'Regan argues that is where we currently find ourselves - enduring this last outpouring of Satan's wrath. Now, if he is correct, this has helped me figure out another puzzle (though this is not discussed in his book). I have had trouble figuring out Sr Lucia's words that the battle against marriage and the family will be the devil's last battle. It seems clear to me after all that Antichrist is not yet here but supposedly we are in the midst of this last battle. However, I now see from O'Regan that after Satan is cast to earth his power is then transferred to Antichrist. So the devil's last battle and the last battle are not the same thing. So, what we are currently waiting for, according to this account, is the appearance of the two witnesses to restore the Church (which he says are the holy pope and emperor) and the preaching of the Gospel to all nations through them. Towards the end of this period the Antichrist will arise and fight against them and after Antichrist is defeated then the end will come. Damien Mackey’s response: Since the interpretations given here, and the associated timetable, are quite different from those that I personally favour (which does not necessarily mean that O’Regan is wrong), I should like to give my reasons for why I must disagree with O’Regan (as here summarised). Failure to recognise the “literal” level Whilst I myself have not read O’Regan’s book, and so am dependent upon my friend’s summary of it, I have read this type of book before, this same sort of approach to the intriguing Book of Apocalypse. That is: “O'Regan's basic thesis is that many of the events narrated in the Apocalypse have taken place in the 20th century …”. The most notable book of this type that springs to mind is Fr. Herman Kramer’s engrossing The Book of Destiny (Tan, 1975). Years ago my friends and I were completely hooked on it. What a fascinating read! I have referred to it briefly in, for instance, my article: John the Evangelist and Vincent Ferrer https://www.academia.edu/44521564/John_the_Evangelist_and_Vincent_Ferrer as follows: Fr. Herman B. Kramer … has brought some connections between St. John and St. Vincent Ferrer in his captivating study on the Apocalypse, The Book of Destiny (Tan, 1975). According to Fr. Kramer’s interpretation of the Apocalypse, each chapter [can] be linked literally to an important era of Christian history. For instance, Revelation chapters 8 and 9 Fr. Kramer aligned with, respectively, the Great Western Schism (C14th-15th AD) and the Protestant Reformation (C16th AD). Perhaps Fr. Kramer’s lynchpin for all this was his identifying of the Eagle, or angel of judgment, of Revelation 8:13, or 14:6, with St. Vincent Ferrer, OP. (ibid., pp. 208-9): By a wonderful co-incidence a great saint appears at this stage [the Western Schism] in the history of the Church. His eminence and influence procured for him the distinction of an eagle flying through mid-heaven. This was the Dominican priest, St. Vincent Ferrer. When in 1398 he lay at death’s door with fever, our Lord, St. Francis and St. Dominic appeared to him, miraculously cured him of his fever and commissioned him to preach penance and prepare men for the coming judgments. Preaching in the open space in San Esteban on October 3, 1408 he solemnly declared that he was the angel of the judgment spoken of by St. John in the Apocalypse. The body of a woman was just being carried to St. Paul’s church nearby for burial. St. Vincent ordered the bearers to bring the corpse before him. He adjured the dead to testify whether his claim was true or not. The dead woman came to life and in the hearing of all bore witness to the truth of the saint’s claim and then slept again in death (Fr. Stanislaus Hogan O.P.). [End of quotes] With all due respect to the supposed testimony of this briefly resuscitated woman, the entire Book of Apocalypse (consisting of 22 chapters) right up to approximately the early verses of chapter 20, at least, belongs to an era - Saint John’s own era - when the old Judaïc system was still in place. I explained this in my article, “Book of Revelation Theme: The Bride and the Reject”, now revised as: Theme of Apocalypse – the Bride and the Reject (3) Theme of Apocalypse – the Bride and the Reject | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu Here is a small part of what I have written on the subject: What has exacerbated the whole exegetical problem of properly interpreting Revelation on a literal level is, I believe, the conventional opinion that St. John wrote this Apocalypse in hoary old age, in c. 95 AD, about a quarter of a century after Jerusalem had been destroyed. Hence many commentators are loath to see any relevance for Revelation in the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Protestant and Catholic writers alike accept the late 95 AD date of authorship (Protestant Thomas Foster sharing this view in common with Opus Dei and Fr. Kramer). However, with the discovery of the Dead Sea Scrolls at Qumran, there has emerged a new scholarship of great expertise as typified by Fr. Jean Carmignac, showing that the books of the New Testament literature (esp. the Gospels), were composed much earlier than was originally thought. And the signs are that the entire New Testament, including Revelation, pre-dates 70 AD. I believe that there is abundant evidence in the Apocalypse to indicate that it was written early. In fact, the reason that prevented my writing this article initially was: Where to start? There is so much! My effort in the end had been greatly assisted by my finding Gentry’s preterist interpretation on the eve of commencing this article. The whole Book of Revelation is focussed upon the Holy Land and especially Jerusalem. The Temple; the golden altar; the 24 elders keeping watch at Beth Moked in the north from where an attack might come (and general Titus did in fact take Jerusalem from there, at the city’s weakest point); the sabbath restrictions; etc., etc. Apart from their late dating of St. John’s Revelation preventing commentators from recognising the obvious, that “Babylon” is Jerusalem, this path they have taken leads them into other awkward anomalies as well. It is commonly believed that St. Paul had already completed his missionary activity and had been martyred well before St. John the Evangelist wrote the Book of Revelation. Paul is given the credit for having established the seven churches to which John later wrote. This view forces commentators into making such strange observations as Fr. Kramer’s: “… St. John could not have interfered in the administration of the churches in the lifetime of St. Paul” (op. cit., pp. 7-8). Oh, no? Was St. Paul (who even refers to himself as a very late arrival on the scene, I Corinthians 15:8) greater than St. John, the Beloved Disciple of Our Lord? St. Paul himself would answer us an emphatic: ‘No’! Of his visit to Jerusalem after his 14 year absence, he tells us: “… James, Cephas and John, these leaders, these pillars, shook hands with Barnabas and me …. The only thing they insisted on was that we should remember to help the poor …” (Galatians 2:9, 10). St. John was by no means subservient to St. Paul; but apparently gave orders to the latter. All the Apostles had a hand in establishing the churches throughout Judaea and Samaria, as Jesus Christ had commanded them, and then “to the ends of the earth”, which St. Paul boasted had been achieved even in his day (Colossians 1:23). And Our Lord told the Apostles, “solemnly”, that they would not have completed “the rounds of the towns of Israel before the Son of Man comes” (Matthew 10:23). [End of quotes] Biblical exegetes down through the centuries have noted various genuine levels of scriptural interpretation, the first (not necessarily the most important) of which being the literal (concrete) level. Now, this is the very level that many pious and, indeed, well-educated commentators, lacking a really solid grounding in the Scriptures and their era, can tend to skip over, leaving things quite vague and unreal. Like a Theology without an underpinning solid philosophy. I had this well in mind when I previously wrote, re Isaiah: …. The “figure” becomes far less “mysterious”, I would suggest, if he is to be grounded in some literal flesh and blood person of Isaiah’s day. Such Christians as those who tend to relate solely to the New Testament, having an extremely poor knowledge of - even sometimes seeming to be virtually allergic to - the Old Testament, will immediately identify Isaiah’s “Suffering Servant” as Jesus Christ the Messiah, without any consideration that the ancient prophet might have intended, directly and literally, some younger contemporary of his …. See e.g. my article: Prophet Jeremiah pre-figures the perfect ‘Suffering Servant’ (3) Prophet Jeremiah prefigures the perfect 'Suffering Servant' | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu Now, whilst I could never accuse Pope Benedict XVI of discounting the Old Testament - he who in his book, Jesus of Nazareth (2011), is at pains show how the Old Testament prefigures and leads to the New Testament - and that Jesus Christ cannot be properly understood without the Old Testament - also writing along such lines as (p. 202): What is remarkable about these [Four Gospel] accounts [of Jesus’ crucifixion and Death] is the multitude of Old Testament allusions and quotations they contain: word of God and event are deeply interwoven. The facts are, so to speak, permeated with the word – with meaning; and the converse is also true: what previously had been merely word – often beyond our capacity to understand – now becomes reality, its meaning unlocked [,] - Benedict does, nevertheless, seem to bypass any possible ancient identification of Isaiah 53’s Suffering Servant in this next statement of his (I had previously quoted this): “In Isaiah, this figure remains mysterious: the Song of the Suffering Servant is like a gaze into the future in search of the one who is to come”. The “figure” becomes far less “mysterious”, I would suggest, if he is to be grounded in some literal flesh and blood person of Isaiah’s day: one who also points to “the one who is to come”, who perfectly fulfils Isaiah’s prophecy, but who also re-interprets it, thereby, in the words of Benedict, ‘unlocking its meaning’. Along somewhat similar lines, the prophet Job has remained “mysterious”, and “like a gaze”, without any known genealogy; or era; or country, unless he be “grounded” in his more historically-endowed alter ego, Tobias, son of Tobit. See e.g. my article: Job’s Life and Times (3) Job’s Life and Times | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu And somewhat similar again is the common tendency to lift the Book of Apocalypse (Revelation) right out of its contemporary era, and interpret it almost wholly as a prophecy pertaining to our times, without realising that its “ground” is the C1st AD, though it also “gazes” prophetically into our day with which its shares some striking parallelisms. But by no means can Apocalypse’s literalness be applied to the modern age. The “Millennium” Why “an indeterminate amount of time” if Revelation 20:2 specifically says “for a thousand years”? A major theme throughout the Apocalypse, according to my “Bride and Reject” article - for which insight I am basically indebted to other commentators - is that the ‘harlot Babylon’, “the great prostitute”, is Jerusalem (Judaïsm and its stone Temple), the former beloved Bride, gone wrong, with the consequence that she is to suffer the fate of a harlot, death and destruction. This was accomplished by the Roman imperial armies around 70 AD. This great cosmic drama carries us right through to chapters 18-19 of the Book of Apocalypse, so that we, now nearing the very end of the book, are still historically only in the C1st AD. Revelation 19:1-4: After this I heard what sounded like the roar of a great multitude in heaven shouting: ‘Hallelujah! Salvation and glory and power belong to our God, for true and just are his judgments. He has condemned the great prostitute who corrupted the earth by her adulteries. He has avenged on her the blood of his servants’. And again they shouted: ‘Hallelujah! The smoke from her goes up for ever and ever’. The twenty-four elders and the four living creatures fell down and worshipped God, who was seated on the throne. And they cried: ‘Amen, Hallelujah!’ That the Judaïc system is still in place at this stage may be indicated by mention here of the “twenty-four elders”. For: “There were twenty-four officers of the sanctuary representing the twenty-four courses of the Levitical priests (1 Chron. 24:4–5, 7–18), as well as twenty-four divisions of singers in the temple (1 Chron. 25). … http://www.pre-trib.org/articles/view/who-are-the-24-elders-in-revelation But, with the demise of the once-good-woman-turned-harlot, Judaïsm, the Divine Bridegroom may marry his new “Bride”, the Church, in “the wedding supper of the Lamb” (vv. 5-9): Then a voice came from the throne, saying: ‘Praise our God, all you his servants, you who fear him, both great and small!’ Then I heard what sounded like a great multitude, like the roar of rushing waters and like loud peals of thunder, shouting: ‘Hallelujah! For our Lord God Almighty reigns. Let us rejoice and be glad and give him glory! For the wedding of the Lamb has come, and his bride has made herself ready. Fine linen, bright and clean, was given her to wear’. Then the angel said to me, ‘Write this: Blessed are those who are invited to the wedding supper of the Lamb!’ And he added, “These are the true words of God”.’ But, firstly, the Beast and his minions have to be destroyed (19:11-21), and the Devil chained (20:1-2): “And I saw an angel coming down out of heaven, having the key to the Abyss and holding in his hand a great chain. He seized the dragon, that ancient serpent, who is the devil, or Satan, and bound him for a thousand years”. Notice it is at this point, with the chaining of Satan after the destruction of Jerusalem, that the “thousand years” is said to commence. Regarding this, the millennium, my friend (refer back to the beginning) had written: On this point, [Emmet O’Regan] notes that Augustine had two interpretations of the millennium in The City of God the first of which became largely forgotten. The latter, more common interpretation is that the millennium represents an indeterminate amount of time following the binding of Satan at our Lord's Passion. The other interpretation he proposed is that the millennium stands for the Sabbath millennium i.e towards the end (but not exactly at the end) of six thousand years from creation the unbinding would happen. …. Why “an indeterminate amount of time” if 20:2 specifically says “for a thousand years”? The vagueness associated with the Apocalyptical “millennium” may be due to chronological miscalculations and uncertainties. Though I would agree approximately with (as written above) the millennium’s ‘following the binding of Satan at our Lord’s Passion’. And I would even consider possible St. Augustine’s other view that, as according to the above, “the millennium stands for the Sabbath millennium i.e towards the end … of six thousand years from creation …”. All of this brings us to the need for, as I think, a massive re-consideration of AD chronology.

Simon Magus was a Son of Perdition

by Damien F. Mackey “Now for some time a man named Simon had practiced sorcery in the city and amazed all the people of Samaria. He boasted that he was someone great, and all the people, both high and low, gave him their attention and exclaimed, ‘This man is rightly called the Great Power of God’. They followed him because he had amazed them for a long time with his sorcery”. Acts 8:9-11 According to some, Simon the Magician was, all at once, Book of Revelation’s Beast and 666; the Antichrist; “the man of sin”; and “the son of perdition”. Jack Walton introduces Simon Magus as “… the most important person in history you never heard of”: https://www.henrymakow.com/simon_magus.html Simon Magus -- The lluminati’s Jesus? January 3, 2011 The full life of Simon Magus is mostly unknown …. …. He was the towering figure of his time, along with his wife, Helen, the Jezebel and whore of Babylon from Revelation. According to Bible Scholars Barbara Thiering and Hans Jonas, Simon Magus was the founder of the Gnostic church and was the direct competitor with Christianity for the hearts and minds of the Greco Roman world. Simon is the Beast, the original Antichrist, and the true identity of the number 666. He was so powerful in fact, that he is known by many different names in the Bible. Once all his "names" are learned, a very different picture of the Gospel emerges, one in which Jesus and Simon were creating two very different religions, for the reformation of Judaism, and the conversion of the Greco Roman/Pagan world to the Judaic god. The circles that Magus worked in were the Illuminati of his time. At the time this consisted of what we would consider both "white" and "black" magicians, including the apostles of Jesus [sic] and the sects they led, (the "good" guys) as well as the Herod family, and the higher echelons of Rome, and the gnostic magicians (the Saturnalian or "black" magicians). Thus, the "good guys" and the "bad guys had their start together at this time and later split up. Simon Magus was a Samaritan Jew, whose particular version of Judaism incorporated the sexual licentiousness of the ancient Babylonian religions. According to Clement, the early church father, Magus could, levitate items on command, speak with spirits, summon demons and place them into statues making the statues walk and talk, fly, and even raise the dead. These were all deceptions designed to indoctrinate his followers into believing he was a god. His religion, the Gnostic religion, was the sect that preceded Christianity in the Diaspora. The current Illuminati religion (freemasonry) is based on Gnosticism and the ancient Babylonian mysticism (Satanism?) that he incorporated into his version of Judaism that he was selling (quite literally) to the masses of the Greco-Roman world. He is the inspiration for Faust, and modern televangelist deceivers continue his tradition whether they realize it or not (i.e., religion based on deception.) Anytime there is a reference to someone selling their soul to the devil, it is a reference to Faust, who was inspired by Simon Magus. The medieval Rosicrucians who compiled the story of Faust understood all this (are they not Illuminati?) One of the great untold stories of Christianity is how Peter and Paul came behind Simon and converted his many followers to Christianity. In the beginning, Magus had been a follower of John the Baptist, and because of his genius and ability, was accepted by … the other Apostles. Simon's early role in Judaism before his diaspora career, would be seen today as like an intelligence operative. He was of course, cast out of their ranks when they learned who he was. One of the major things he did was attempt to organize a mass revolt against Pilate and the son of Herod, which was put down brutally. …. …. Because of his stature, and the complexity of his life … Simon's accomplishments were divided by the Christians, and attributed to multiple people, under multiple pseudonyms. In other words, he was so dangerous, that he was practically wiped from history, except for those "in the know." A great animosity existed between Simon and Peter. Simon's religion was based on deception, (Simon represented himself as a god), allowed for sexual licentiousness (the origins of "sex-magic", which included orgies and homosexuality by his followers. Peter taught abstinence in marriage, except for procreation, and this drew a lot of women to his flock. …. [End of quote] According to David L. Eastman, in “Simon the Anti-Christ? The Magos as Christos in Early Christian Literature”, Simon Magus was, for the early Christians, a “wicked, deceitful anti-Christ, the very embodiment of evil”: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/2222582X.2016.1218953 None of the early Christian sources denies that Simon had power to do things that others could not do. He is consistently remembered and presented as a figure who could perform amazing deeds to astound the crowds, even if he did so through the despicable arts of sorcery. In his various, reimagined guises, Simon was formidable because he was powerful, even if that power came from demons, as Peter asserts in his prayers to strike down Simon. In the earliest Christian centuries, when there existed a perceived threat of alternative Christologies, Simon is presented as the champion of ‘heresies’ such as Modalism and Docetism. …. The authors of the later apocryphal texts, writing in a different cultural and ecclesiastical context, amend the earlier traditions and present a potent Simon in order to highlight the even greater power of the apostles. Peter and Paul confront and conquer this wicked, deceitful anti-Christ, the very embodiment of evil. …. [End of quote] The following description of “the man of sin”, “the son of perdition”, in Wayne Jackson’s article “Who Is Paul’s ‘Man of Sin’?”, seems to me to be perfectly applicable to Simon Magus (though this is by no means the conclusion that Wayne Jackson himself will reach): https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/677-who-is-pauls-man-of-sin Traits of the Man of Sin Once a student has thoroughly read 2 Thessalonians 2:1-12, we believe that it is possible to isolate certain tell-tale qualities of this diabolical force, and work toward a solution as to the identity of the “man of sin.” Consider the following factors. The Man of Sin and The Apostasy The Man of Sin is the ultimate result of the falling away from the faith (v. 3). The expression “falling away” translates the Greek term apostasia. Our English word “apostasy” is an anglicized form of this original term. In the Bible, the word is used of a defection from the religion ordained by God. As a noun, it is employed of departure from the Mosaic system (Acts 21:21), and, in this present passage, of defection from Christianity. The verbal form of the term is similarly used in 1 Timothy 4:1 (cf. Heb. 3:12). Note also that the noun is qualified by a definite article (the apostasia). A definite movement is in the apostle’s prophetic vision — not merely a principle of defection. The Man of Sin Was Yet to Be Revealed This sinister force, from a first-century vantage point, was yet to be revealed (v. 3). This appears to suggest that the movement had not evolved to the point where it could be identified definitely by the primitive saints. It awaited future development. The Man of Sin and Son of Perdition This persecuting power was designated as the man of sin (v. 3), because sin was its “predominating quality” (Ellicott, p. 118). This character, referred to in both neuter and masculine genders (vv. 6-7), is the son of perdition (v. 3), because its end is to be perdition, i.e., destruction, by the Lord himself (v. 8). The Lawless One This opponent of God is called the lawless one (v. 8). This power has no regard for the law of God. One cannot but be reminded of that infamous “little horn” in Daniel’s vision: “[H]e shall think to change the times and the law” (7:25). Man of Sin: Opposes God, Exalts Himself, and Sits in the Temple of God The Man of Sin opposes God and exalts himself against all that is genuinely sacred (v. 4). He feigns religiosity, but his true character reveals that he is diabolic. His activity actually is according to the working of Satan (v. 9). In some sense, the Man of Sin will sit in the temple of God (v. 4). …. The implication of Paul’s warning is this. This unholy being is viewed as being a “church” character. The expression “sitteth” may hint of unparalleled arrogance (Ellicott, pp. 119-120). Mason notes that the language describes the Man of Sin as attempting to exact “divine homage” from people (p. 169). Moreover, this Son of Perdition sets himself forth as God. The present participle (“sets forth continually”) reveals that this presumptive posture is characteristic of the Man of Sin. This person represents himself as God, either: • by making claims that belong only to deity; • by receiving adoration reserved exclusively for God; or, • by usurping prerogatives which only God can accomplish. Clearly, the Man of Sin is an ecclesiastical character. Recall the description of John’s lamb-like beast in Revelation 13:11ff. The Man of Sin Deceives with Lying Miracles He deceives those who love not the truth, by virtue of the lying wonders he effects (vv. 9-10). Bloomfield calls these “pretended miracles” (p. 345). These “wonders” are not in the category of Christ’s miracles. Lenski has well commented: “So many are ready to attribute real miracles to Satan and to his agents; the Scriptures never do” (p. 426). …. Man of Sin Already at Work in Paul’s Day The early stages of this ecclesiastical apostasy were already at work in the early church (v. 7). The Greek term (energeitai, a present tense, middle voice form) suggests that this movement currently was working itself towards a greater goal. …. Restrained During Paul’s Day In Paul’s day there was some influence that restrained the budding Man of Sin. This was some sort of abstract force, as evidenced by the neuter form of katechon, “the restraining thing” (v. 6). And yet, this force was strongly associated with a person/persons as suggested by the masculine, “he who restrains” (v. 7). Likely the significance is that of a broad power, operating under individual rulers. Unlike the Man of Sin, whose identity was later to be revealed, the early saints knew personally of this restraining force. "You know (oidate — “to know from observation” — Vine, p. 444). This indicates that the restraining power was an entity contemporary with Paul, not a modern one. Restraining Force To Be Removed The restraining force eventually would *be taken out of the way", or, more correctly, “be gone.” And so, the Man of Sin, in “his own season,” would be revealed openly (vv. 6, 7). Ellicott says that it is a season “appointed and ordained by God” (p. 121). One recalls that the “little horn” of Daniel’s fourth beast only rose to prominence after three horns were plucked up to make room for it. Too, the earth-beast of John’s vision came into full power after the sea-beast had received a death-stroke, but was healed. And so here, the restraining power will give way to the horrible revelation of the Man of Sin. .... [End of quotes] Movement of apostasy, lawlessness, against all that is genuinely sacred, feignedly religious, diabolical, working according to power of Satan, a pseudo-Christian pretender, setting himself forth as a God, and so on. It reads just like the blasphemous profile of Simon Magus. Acts 8:18-23: When Simon saw that the Spirit was given at the laying on of the apostles’ hands, he offered them money and said, ‘Give me also this ability so that everyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit’. Peter answered: ‘May your money perish with you, because you thought you could buy the gift of God with money! You have no part or share in this ministry, because your heart is not right before God. Repent of this wickedness and pray to the Lord in the hope that he may forgive you for having such a thought in your heart. For I see that you are full of bitterness and captive to sin’.

Jewish Zealots like a wild beast grown mad … eating its own flesh

“But for the present sedition, one should not mistake if he called it a sedition begotten by another sedition: and to be like a wild beast grown mad, which, for want of food from abroad, fell now upon eating its own flesh.” Flavius Josephus Adam Maarschalk asked, in 2017: https://adammaarschalk.com/2017/04/09/who-was-the-beast-five-clues-long-island-conference-presentation/ Who Was the Beast? (Five Clues) – Long Island Conference Presentation On March 25th I had the privilege of speaking for the second year in a row at the Blue Point Bible Conference in Long Island, New York. The theme of this conference, which was hosted by Pastor Michael Miano, was “Revelation Revealed.” It was a great weekend of fellowship, learning, encouragement, and discussion. I was also very glad to be able to bring my wife, Jasmine, along with me this year. My presentation revolved around five clues from the book of Revelation about the identity of the beast. Here’s the video, along with my written notes: Introduction The topic that I’m discussing is one that appears in eight out of 22 chapters in the book of Revelation. More space is given to this topic than to the harlot, the two witnesses, New Jerusalem, etc. So this topic is a key part of what John wanted to communicate to his first century readers. This topic is “the beast.” In John’s day, the consequences for following the beast were very heavy, but the blessings for overcoming the beast were also very great. We see this contrast in Revelation 14 and 15, where one group received the full strength of God’s wrath and fiery torment, while the other group had the privilege of standing on the sea of glass and singing the song of Moses and the song of the Lamb: “Then a third angel followed them, saying with a loud voice, ‘If anyone worships the beast and his image, and receives his mark on his forehead or on his hand, he himself shall also drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out full strength into the cup of His indignation. And he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels and in the presence of the Lamb. And the smoke of their torment ascends forever and ever; and they have no rest day or night, who worship the beast and his image, and whoever receives the mark of his name’” (Rev. 14:9-11). “I saw something like a sea of glass mingled with fire, and those who have the victory over the beast, over his image and over his mark and over the number of his name, standing on the sea of glass, having harps of God. And they sing the song of Moses, the servant of God, and the song of the Lamb, saying: ‘Great and marvelous are Your works, Lord God Almighty! Just and true are Your ways, O King of the saints! Who shall not fear You, O Lord, and glorify Your name? For You alone are holy. For all nations shall come and worship before You, for Your judgments have been manifested’” (Rev. 15:2-4). So there’s no doubt that the beast was a great enemy to the church, but who was this enemy? Was this enemy Roman? Or was it Jewish? Whoever or whatever it was, there are details about the beast in Daniel 7, and Revelation 11, 13 – 17, and 19 – 20 which all need to be reconciled. These details include:  10 horns on the beast  a little horn coming up among the 10 horns  three horns that fell before the little horn  the little horn persecuting the saints for 3.5 years and changing time and law  a second beast that works very closely with the first beast  seven heads of the beast  a wounded head  the dragon, beast, and false prophet working together to gather people to a great battle  the beast and false prophet cast into the lake of fire This presentation won’t cover all these details, but see the “Glossary of Terms” at the end of this article for some more details. In my studies over the last six months or so, I’ve come to some very different conclusions than those I used to hold about the beast. Beginning in 2009, I believed that the beast was Rome (generally) and Nero (specifically). I did have unanswered questions, especially when it came to Daniel 7 and Revelation 19, but I kept those questions on the back burner. When I finally brought those questions to the forefront, I came to realize that Rome and Nero didn’t fit the visions that Daniel and John had about a beast that would oppose God’s people. Damien Mackey’s comment: On Nero, see e.g. my article: Nero and Herod, the Magi, and slaughter of innocents (5) Nero and Herod, the Magi, and slaughter of innocents | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu Adam Maarschalk continues: I’ve been putting together a series on this subject in chronological order, moving from Daniel 2 into Daniel 7 and on to Revelation 11, Revelation 13, and to the other chapters which at least mention the beast. In this presentation, though, I’d like to highlight certain pieces of evidence which I believe show that the beast was Israel, and in particular the Zealot movement in Israel that captured the loyalty of so many Jews in the first century. I’ve come to believe that the beast of Revelation wasn’t about emperor worship and persecuting those who wouldn’t worship the emperor Nero. Instead it was about:  extreme nationalism  idolizing and worshiping the kingdom of Israel  the persecution and killing of those who wouldn’t follow the war agenda of the Zealots and the Sicarii  a strong rejection of Jesus’ message that His kingdom isn’t of this world  a strong rejection of the Prince of Peace and His call to be peacemakers  clinging to Mount Sinai, the Jerusalem below, and the kingdom that could be shaken instead of embracing Mount Zion, the Jerusalem above and the kingdom that couldn’t be shaken (Galatians 4:21-31 and Hebrews 12:18-29) Five Clues About the Beast’s Identity In this presentation we will analyze five passages in Revelation in an effort to understand the beast’s identity: 1. The fifth bowl was poured out on the beast (Revelation 16:10-11). 2. The beast was given to the burning flame (Daniel 7:11; Revelation 19:20). 3. Who was killed by the sword AND went into captivity (Revelation 13:10)? 4. Who destroyed and burned the harlot (Revelation 17:16)? 5. How did the two beasts relate to “those who dwell on the earth” (Revelation 13:3-15)? 1. The Fifth Bowl Poured Out on the Beast (Revelation 16:10-11) The first piece of evidence I’d like to discuss has to do with the fifth bowl judgment. Here’s how Revelation 16:10-11 describes the pouring out of the fifth bowl: “Then the fifth angel poured out his bowl on the throne of the beast, and his kingdom became full of darkness; and they gnawed their tongues because of the pain. And they blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, and did not repent of their deeds.” Notice that this bowl is poured out on the beast’s throne and kingdom. I want us to consider this fact in light of an observation that a number of preterist teachers and websites have rightfully made. That observation is that the seven seals, seven trumpets, and seven bowls were opened, sounded, and poured out on 1st century Israel (Judea, Samaria, Galilee). For example, in the book, “Four Views on The Book of Revelation,” by Stanley Gundry and C. Marvin Pate, Kenneth Gentry represents the preterist view. He says this on page 72: “John turns his attention to further judgments on the land [of Israel] by means of the three woes (14:6-21) and the seven bowls (chaps. 15-16).” Kenneth Gentry, of course, is well-known for his books and DVDs which teach that the beast was Rome and Nero. I don’t mean any disrespect to him, but he contradicts himself here when he says that [1] all seven bowl judgments were for Israel and [2] Rome was the beast, and yet Revelation 16:10 says that the fifth bowl was to be poured out on the throne and kingdom of the beast. I used to be inconsistent on that point as well. There are several reasons why it’s valid to say that Israel was the target of the seven seals, trumpets, and bowls. I’ll list two of them:  Concerning the seven bowls, Revelation 16:1 shows that their target is “the earth,” otherwise translated as “the land,” that is, the land of Israel (I’ll discuss this translation pattern more when we look at Revelation 13). Here’s what verse 1 says: “Then I heard a loud voice from the temple saying to the seven angels, ‘Go and pour out the bowls of the wrath of God on the earth’” (or ‘on the land’). So there was a specific land that the seven bowls would be poured out upon, and that land was Israel.  In Leviticus 26:18-28 God repeatedly warned Israel that a time would come when they would be punished “seven times” for their sins, as God would execute the vengeance of His covenant (verse 25). It’s no coincidence that the covenant imagery of Mount Sinai (Exodus 19) appears in the opening of the seventh seal, the sounding of the seventh trumpet, and the pouring out of the seventh bowl (e.g. thunder, lightning, an earthquake, loud sounds, and smoke/fire). Those seven-fold judgments of Leviticus 26 were reserved for Israel alone. They weren’t for both Israel and Rome. So it follows that when the fifth bowl judgment was poured out “on the throne of the beast,” it was Israel, not Rome, which experienced that darkness and pain. It was Israel that represented the kingdom of the beast. If the fifth bowl was poured out on Rome, then the bowls were only a six-fold judgment on Israel and “a one-fold judgment” on Rome, but that’s not the case. Leviticus 26 was completely, not partially, fulfilled. Revelation 16:11 says that “pains” and “sores” would come upon the people who lived in the beast’s kingdom, and implies that further judgment would come upon this kingdom for refusing to repent. During the Jewish-Roman War did people throughout the Roman Empire experience “pains” and “sores,” or did this happen to the people of Israel? When we read Josephus’ descriptions of civil war, famine conditions, dead bodies lying unburied, etc., it’s easy enough to understand that Israel was plagued by “pains” and “sores” during that time, and this was especially true in Jerusalem. It was Israel that refused to repent, and it was upon Israel that more judgments were heaped. 2. The Beast Was Given to the Burning Flame (Daniel 7:11, Revelation 19:20) The second point I’d like to bring up is the language of Daniel 7:11 and Revelation 19:20. Here’s what these two verses say: “…I watched till the beast was slain, and its body destroyed and given to the burning flame” (Daniel 7:11). “Then the beast was captured, and with him the false prophet who worked signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image. These two were cast alive into the lake of fire burning with brimstone” (Revelation 19:20). If the Roman Empire was the beast of Revelation, how was this empire captured, slain, destroyed, burned, and cast into the lake of fire? Rome actually came out of the Jewish-Roman War (AD 66 -73) stronger than ever. History tells us that Rome was stronger in the second century AD than it was in the first century AD. Someone might say that this applied to Nero, who is said to be the beast in a singular sense. Nero was indeed killed – with his own sword, but he was not captured and he was not burned. Nor did he go down at the same time as any false prophets who worked with him. Furthermore, Revelation 19:21 suggests that it was the followers of the beast and the false prophet whose flesh was consumed by the birds. This further confirms that it was Israel that was captured, slain, destroyed, and burned – as we can see in great detail in “Wars of the Jews” by Josephus. 3. Who Was Killed by the Sword AND Went Into Captivity (Revelation 13:10)? On a related note, in Revelation 13:10 we see a prophecy about the ultimate fate of the beast, and this prophecy was to be a comfort to the saints who were under persecution. John writes: “He who leads into captivity shall go into captivity; he who kills with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.” Some Romans were certainly killed in the Jewish-Roman War, but the end result was victory for Rome. On the other hand, there were mass casualties for Israel, the Zealots, and the pilgrims who came to Jerusalem from many nations but got trapped in the city when the siege began in April AD 70. It’s important to take note of the first part of this verse: “He who leads into captivity shall go into captivity…” The Romans took people captive, but were they themselves taken captive? No, they weren’t. The Jewish Zealots also took people captive, especially their fellow Jews who wouldn’t go along with their war agenda. Were the Zealots themselves taken captive? Yes, they were. This prophecy was about them. To point out a couple examples, the Zealot leaders John Levi of Gischala and Simon Bar Giora were both taken captive by the Romans in August or September AD 70, and both were humiliated in a parade all the way to the city of Rome. John was sentenced to life in prison and Simon was executed as “the general” of the revolt. See Wars 6.9.4, Wars 7.2.2, Wars 7.5.3, Wars 7.5.6. 4. Who Destroyed and Burned the Harlot? (Revelation 17:16) Revelation 17:16 predicted what the 10 horns of the beast would do to the harlot: “And the ten horns which you saw on the beast, these will hate the harlot, make her desolate and naked, eat her flesh and burn her with fire.” The harlot, of course, was the city of Jerusalem. As we see in Revelation 17:18 and elsewhere, the harlot was also called “the great city.” And when “the great city” was first mentioned in Revelation 11:8 it was said to be the place “where our Lord was crucified,” i.e. Jerusalem. 1. Who made Jerusalem desolate? 2. Who ate her flesh? 3. Who burned her with fire? Was it Rome, or was it Israel under the Jewish Zealots? Josephus addressed all three of these questions repeatedly. For example, in Wars 5.1.1, 5 Josephus said that when the Zealots attacked the people of Jerusalem in February/March AD 68, this was the beginning of the city’s destruction. He also said that the Zealots were “like a wild beast grown mad” that was “eating its own flesh” and tearing the city into pieces: “Now as to the attack the zealots made upon the people, and which I esteem the beginning of the city’s destruction, it hath been already explained after an accurate manner; as also whence it arose, and to how great a mischief it was increased. But for the present sedition, one should not mistake if he called it a sedition begotten by another sedition, and to be like a wild beast grown mad, which, for want of food from abroad, fell now upon eating its own flesh… And now, as the city was engaged in a war on all sides, from these treacherous crowds of wicked men, the people of the city, between them, were like a great body torn in pieces.” Josephus also said in Wars 5.6.1 that the Romans showed more kindness to Jerusalem than the Zealots did: “…for they never suffered any thing that was worse from the Romans than they made each other suffer; nor was there any misery endured by the city after these men’s actions that could be esteemed new. But it was most of all unhappy before it was overthrown, while those that took it [i.e. the Romans] did it a greater kindness for I venture to affirm that the sedition destroyed the city, and the Romans destroyed the sedition, which it was a much harder thing to do than to destroy the walls; so that we may justly ascribe our misfortunes to our own people, and the just vengeance taken on them to the Romans…” FIRE ….

Fatima revelations and the message of Divine Mercy

“Sr. Lucia and St. Faustina, who were contemporaries, were each given a mission to spread the same message, though different in aspect. While Our Lady of Fatima gave Sr. Lucia a warning of divine judgment and the need for penance, Our Lord came to St. Faustina to encourage souls to implore his mercy as a final recourse to be saved from this impending judgment”. Gretchen Filz The Connection Between St. Faustina and Fatima Jul 05, 2017 by Gretchen Filz https://www.catholiccompany.com/magazine/st-faustina-fatima-6087 What do the private revelations of St. Faustina Kowalska have in common with the events at Fatima? Visions of a destroying angel and of the Holy Trinity, the 13th day, a call to penance, and a fervent prayer for mercy. The Blessed Virgin Mary chose to appear at Fatima in 1917 on the 13th day of the month from May to October, for the purpose of warning the world of its need for penance, and the impending dangers it faced if it did not—the first of which was a second world war. In the years leading up to World War II, a related message was given to a young Polish nun named Sister Faustina Kowalska. On the 13th of September in 1935, St. Faustina received a vision in her convent cell. Similar to the earlier vision given to the three shepherd children at Fatima, Faustina's vision was of an angel, who was ready to execute God's wrath in punishment for the sins of mankind, and of the Holy Trinity. St. Faustina earnestly prayed for mercy as she beheld the destroying angel ready to unleash the impending judgment on the world. It was on this 13th day of the month that Our Lord revealed a prayer to St. Faustina known as the Chaplet of Divine Mercy. As written in the Diary of St. Faustina: "[The angel] was clothed in a dazzling robe, his face gloriously bright, a cloud beneath his feet. From the cloud, bolts of thunder and flashes of lightning were springing into his hands; and from his hand they were going forth, and only then were they striking the earth. When I saw this sign of divine wrath which was about to strike the earth, and in particular a certain place, which for good reasons I cannot name, I began to implore the angel to hold off for a few moments, and the world would do penance. But my plea was a mere nothing in the face of the divine anger. Just then I saw the Most Holy Trinity. The greatness of Its majesty pierced me deeply, and I did not dare to repeat my entreaties. At that very moment I felt in my soul the power of Jesus' grace, which dwells in my soul. When I became conscious of this grace, I was instantly snatched up before the Throne of God. Oh, how great is our Lord and God and how incomprehensible His holiness! I will make no attempt to describe this greatness, because before long we shall all see Him as He is. I found myself pleading with God for the world with words heard interiorly. As I was praying in this manner, I saw the Angel’s helplessness: he could not carry out the just punishment which was rightly due for sins. Never before had I prayed with such inner power as I did then. The words with which I entreated God are these: Eternal Father, I offer You the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Your dearly beloved Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, in atonement for our sins and those of the whole world; for the sake of His sorrowful Passion, have mercy on us. The next morning, when I entered chapel, I heard these words interiorly: Every time you enter the chapel, immediately recite the prayer which I taught you yesterday.' When I had said the prayer, in my soul I heard these words: 'This prayer will serve to appease My wrath . . ." Sr. Lucia also had a vision of both a destroying angel ready to inflict God's punishment on the earth, and, years later, of the Holy Trinity. In her account of the apparition of Our Lady at Fatima on July 13, 1917, the message of which was part of the Third Secret, Lucia writes: "After the two parts which I have already explained, at the left of Our Lady and a little above, we saw an Angel with a flaming sword in his left hand; flashing, it gave out flames that looked as though they would set the world on fire; but they died out in contact with the splendour that Our Lady radiated towards him from her right hand: pointing to the earth with his right hand, the Angel cried out in a loud voice: 'Penance, Penance, Penance!'" On the 13th day of June in the year 1929, Sr. Lucia received this vision of the Holy Trinity as she was making a Holy Hour: "Suddenly the whole chapel was illumined by a supernatural light, and above the altar appeared a cross of light, reaching to the ceiling. In a brighter light on the upper part of the cross, could be seen the face of a man and his body as far as the waist, upon his breast was a dove also of light and nailed to the cross was the body of another man. A little below the waist, I could see a chalice and a large host suspended in the air, on to which drops of blood were falling from the face of Jesus Crucified and from the wound in His side. These drops ran down on to the host and fell into the chalice. Beneath the right arm of the cross was Our Lady and in her hand was her Immaculate Heart. (It was Our Lady of Fatima, with her Immaculate Heart in her left hand, without sword or roses, but with a crown of thorns and flames). Under the left arm of the cross, large letters, as if of crystal clear water which ran down upon the altar, formed these words: ‘Grace and Mercy.’ I understood that it was the Mystery of the Most Holy Trinity which was shown to me, and I received lights about this mystery which I am not permitted to reveal . . ." During this vision of the Holy Trinity, Our Lady proceeded to make her request, as foretold in 1917, for the consecration of Russia in order to prevent the calamities that were ready to sweep over the world. In the vision recounted above, Sr. Lucia beheld both blood and water emanating from Christ, similar imagery to the Divine Mercy vision that was later revealed to St. Faustina. Was the light of this mystery, which Sr. Lucia was not permitted to reveal, the mystery of the Divine Mercy which was soon to be given to St. Faustina? Read next Everything You Need to Know about the Divine Mercy Devotion Sr. Lucia and St. Faustina, who were contemporaries, were each given a mission to spread the same message, though different in aspect. While Our Lady of Fatima gave Sr. Lucia a warning of divine judgment and the need for penance, Our Lord came to St. Faustina to encourage souls to implore his mercy as a final recourse to be saved from this impending judgment. Sr. Lucia made known that the message of Fatima, namely, the Third Secret, was connected to the frightful global judgments found in the Book of Revelation. Our Lord, in light of these future punishments for mankind's sin, said to St. Faustina, "Before the Day of Justice, I am sending the Day of Mercy." The prayers taught interiorly to the two nuns were also similar. The prayer the Angel of Peace taught to the three children of Fatima prior to Our Lady's appearances: "Most Holy Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, I adore You profoundly, and I offer You the most precious Body, Blood, Soul, and Divinity of Jesus Christ, present in all the tabernacles of the world, in reparation for the outrages, sacrileges, and indifference with which He Himself is offended. And, through the infinite merits of His most Sacred Heart, and of the Immaculate Heart of Mary, I beg of You for the conversion of poor sinners." And the Divine Mercy prayer given to St. Faustina: "Eternal Father, I offer You the Body and Blood, Soul and Divinity of Your dearly Beloved Son, Our Lord Jesus Christ, in atonement for our sins and those of the whole world." Both nuns would also pray for God's mercy on the world while standing with arms extended out to their sides, in the same manner as Our Lord suffered on the cross. They also both prayed earnestly for the spiritual conversion of their home countries; Lucia for Portugal, and Faustina for Poland. May we let the example of Sr. Lucia and St. Faustina be a call to respond to the urgent need for prayer and penance during the evil times in which we are now living, namely for the temporal protection of our countries and the eternal salvation of souls. Do you want to learn more about the apparitions of Our Lady at Fatima? Subscribe to our 30-day content series at GoodCatholic.com.

Matthew, in his Genealogy, may not have omitted any king of Judah

by Damien F. Mackey “Had Matthew included all these names, the generations would have numbered twenty instead of fourteen. Fourteen, for Matthew’s purposes, was very important (cf. Matt 1:17)”. Mitch Chase A typical assessment of Matthew the Evangelist’s list of the Kings of Judah (1:7-11) – and one with which I would fully have agreed some time ago – is clearly laid out in this short piece (2013) by Mitch Chase: https://mitchchase.wordpress.com/2013/12/07/why-are-there-missing-kings-in-matthew-1/ Why Are There Missing Kings in Matthew 1? Matthew’s genealogy is edited, and by that I mean he has omitted certain kings in the second section (Matt 1:6b-11). Here are his fourteen generations represented by names: Solomon, Rehoboam, Abijah, Asaph, Jehoshaphat, Joram, Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, Hezekiah, Manasseh, Amos, Josiah, and Jechoniah. In 2 Kings, it is clear that between the reigns of Joram and Uzziah are three other kings: Ahaziah (2 Kgs 8:25-29), Jehoash (2 Kgs 12:1-21), and Amaziah (2 Kgs 14:1-22). Matthew condenses the genealogy by omitting these three rulers. This is not historical ignorance or oversight. Matthew explains in 1:17 that he has a numerical design to the genealogy of 1:2-16. And since he wants to show fourteen generations, some kings have to be left out. Ahaziah, Jehoash, and Amaziah were all evil kings, so we’re not missing anything edifying. They were a trinity to ignore! Then between Josiah and Jechoniah (aka Jehoiachin), Matthew omits Jehoahaz (2 Kgs 23:31-34) and Jehoiakim (2 Kgs 24:1-2). Again the reason appears to be his literary design. The last reigning king in the Davidic line before the exile was not Jechoniah, however. It was Zedekiah, Jechoniah’s uncle. Zedekiah, then, is another Matthean omission. Why leave out the last king of Judah? Grant Osborne is probably right: Matthew believed the Babylonian exile began under Jechoniah’s reign and so focused on him (Matthew, ZECNT, 66-67). In summary, what were the omissions Matthew made in the second section of his genealogy (Matt 1:6b-11)? (1) Ahaziah (2) Jehoash (3) Amaziah (4) Jehoahaz (5) Jehoiakim (6) Zedekiah Had Matthew included all these names, the generations would have numbered twenty instead of fourteen. Fourteen, for Matthew’s purposes, was very important (cf. Matt 1:17). [End of quote] I would no longer accept this method of appraisal. Firstly, I have by now written several articles identifying Mitch Chase’s (2) Jehoash, and (3) Amaziah, as, respectively, Uzziah and Jotham. For example: Early prophet Zechariah may forge a link with Joash, Uzziah of Judah (7) Early prophet Zechariah may forge a link with Joash, Uzziah of Judah | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu And Mitch Chase’s (5) Jehoiakim, I have identified with Manasseh. For example: Matthew’s Genealogy of Jesus the Messiah far from straightforward (7) Matthew's Genealogy of Jesus the Messiah far from straightforward | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu As for Mitch Chase’s (1) Ahaziah, (4) Jehoahaz, and (6) Zedekiah, I have until very recently given very little consideration to these names. But that has now changed, with a recent article of mine being about (4) Jehoahaz, appearing in Matthew’s list, so I suggest, under two alter ego names: Amon and Jehoiachin. Thus: Whatever did happen to King Jehoahaz of Judah? (7) Whatever did happen to King Jehoahaz of Judah? | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu And I hope shortly to do a similar type of resuscitation with Mitch Chase’s (1) Ahaziah. As for Mitch Chase’s (6) Zedekiah, only a few days ago I had written this about him: I am not interested, since Matthew appears to have deliberately omitted him. For, as Mitch Chase himself has rightly noted: “Why leave out the last king of Judah? Grant Osborne is probably right: Matthew believed the Babylonian exile began under Jechoniah’s [Jehoiachin’s] reign and so focused on him (Matthew, ZECNT, 66-67)”. As in the cases of Jehoahaz and Ahaziah, I am now having serious second thoughts as well about Zedekiah - that he may, in fact, be a duplicate of Manasseh (= Jehoiakim). While I am well aware that any attempt to identify Zedekiah as Manasseh/Jehoiakim will encounter some awkward chronological difficulties, there initially do appear to be certain promising points of comparison. For instance: - Original name, Manasseh, Mattaniah (for Zedekiah) has phonetic (if not meaning) similarity; - Jehoiakim, Zedekiah reigned for 11 years; - Jehoiakim, Zedekiah had Egypt as an ally; - Jehoiakim, Zedekiah fully wicked; - Jehoiakim, Zedekiah revolted against King Nebuchednezzar and went into captivity. So, rather than lean on the latter part of the quote above: “Matthew believed the Babylonian exile began under Jechoniah’s [Jehoiachin’s] reign and so focused on him”, I may now be more inclined to lean on its first part: “Why leave out the last king of Judah?” [Meaning Zedekiah – but who may not have been the last]. I am now disinclined, as well, to think that the number 14 was important to Matthew, as Mitch Chase thinks: “Had Matthew included all these names, the generations would have numbered twenty instead of fourteen. Fourteen, for Matthew’s purposes, was very important (cf. Matt 1:17)”. I now think that this may have been an artificial gloss later attached to the Genealogy. Whilst I am now inclined to believe that no Kings of Judah may have been omitted from Matthew’s genealogical list, I am of the opinion that there are some unwarranted duplications in the text as we now have it: (Tentatively) I think that Abijah was the same as Asa; (Confidently) I think that Hezekiah was Josiah; and that Amon (Haman) was Jehoiachin.

Converting to a somewhat uncertain Jesus

by Damien F. Mackey “Dawkins was shocked that his former atheist ally [Ayaan Hirsi Ali] had switched. He is a cultural Christian. He likes the fruit of the Gospel, but he doesn’t like the root of the Gospel. …”. Tony Davenport Introduction Tony Davenport has called this year of 2024: https://vision.org.au/news/year-of-celebrity-conversions/ Year Of ‘Celebrity’ Conversions And he writes: Despite the increasingly anti-Christian culture we live in, it seems more and more celebrities from the entertainment, intellectual and business world are having the courage to speak up about how they are embracing the faith and acknowledge that they are not celebrities in the eyes of Jesus, that they are just like everyone else. Steven McAlpine who’s an award-winning Christian author, commentator, pastor and national consultant for churches and Christian schools, has been investigating the phenomenon. He told Vision Radio’s 20Twenty program: “It’s certainly not a time to keep your head up if you are Christian. You would lose a lot of followers I would have thought if you were a celebrity at the moment. But at the same time, there’s a tension in our culture that has seen [actor and comedian] Russell Brand, in particular, over the past 3 or 4 years, lean into spirituality. “It’s very easy to use the ‘God’ word. But Russell Brand’s become more and more focused and eventually got baptised in the River Thames [by adventurer Bear Grylls] about 4 or 5 months ago. And on every Tik Tok, Instagram or YouTube video, he’s talking about something from the Scriptures as none of those other things that he was pursuing seemed to satisfy him. It went from an intellectual curiosity to: I need something in myself as I look at the way the world is, but also as I look at how I am. And that’s the same with Ayaan Hirsi Ali.” Ayaan Hirsi Ali is a former figurehead of the New Atheism movement, a global activist, social commentator, women’s rights advocate, author, podcaster and fierce critic of Islam. The Somalia-born Dutch American intellectual is a former Netherlands MP and a researcher for the Hoover Institution at Stanford University as well as the American Enterprise Institute. Her conversion is remarkable as she publicly expressed regret for her previous critiques of Christianity, openly recanting her past assertions that all religions, including Christianity, were equally damaging. Stephen McAlpine told Vision Radio: “There’s a deep interest in cultural Christianity at the moment, that the Christian framework gave the West something that we’re now losing. And even if they’re not becoming Christian, a lot of other intellectuals particularly, are going: There’s something in the framework that we would not want to give out too easily, but people like Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Russell Brand have gone the whole hog, I think.” “Ayaan Hirsi Ali wrote an article last year which was called Why I am Now a Christian. And it blew categories out of the water. She said that she’d moved to Christian frameworks because of the cultural stuff as she read history, but she stopped and looked and said it’s something about her that needed to change. [Fellow New Atheism champion] Richard Dawkins was so upset about this that they had a public debate and at the end of the conversation he said: I came here today Ayaan to convince you that you’re not a Christian. Now, I see that you are a Christian and Christianity is stupid. It makes no sense.” “Dawkins was shocked that his former atheist ally had switched. He is a cultural Christian. He likes the fruit of the Gospel, but he doesn’t like the root of the Gospel. …”. [End of quote] It’s happening in Australia as well. The Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese, whose three great loves in life are, he has said, the Labor Party, the South Sydney Rabbitohs, and the Catholic Church, has been seen slipping off to Mass lately. ‘Albo’, who has forever been telling us how he grew up in public housing in inner city Sydney, has just bought himself a $4.3 million dollar mansion, leading to speculation that he will soon be seeking new pastures. Tent cities for the homeless have sprung up. And another Socialist and Labor man of long-standing, journalist and TV show host, Joe Hildebrand, now writes frequently about Jesus, including an article yesterday in The Saturday Telegraph (Nov. 16, 2024): “Original superstar found path to peace”. Without judging the intentions or motives of any of these celebs, one must wonder to what extent do they realise who Jesus really is. He himself was at pains to know, asking this loaded I AM question (Mark 8:27): ‘WHO DO PEOPLE SAY THAT I AM?’ No one seemed to know for sure (v. 28): “And they told him, ‘John the Baptist; and others say, Elijah; and others, one of the prophets’.” Finally, Peter came to the rescue (v. 29): “And he asked them, ‘But who do you say that I am?’ Peter answered him, ‘You are the Christ’.” Joe Hildebrand, an exuberant and entertaining writer, will give his own opinion about Jesus Christ, as we shall be reading. In the case of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, on the other hand, critics have noted that she rarely seems to mention Jesus Christ. To give some examples of this, taken from: https://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/17sw1z1/ayaan_hirsi_ali_why_i_am_now_a_christian/ As a Christian, I am very glad for Ms. Ali to become a Christian herself. As a reader analyzing her essay however, she seems to be making a cultural/ political choice. It’s clear why she rejects the Islam with which she was raised. She is less clear about the “God hole” and emptiness of atheism and secularism as opposed to “Western culture” being under threat. What I don’t see is any mention of Jesus or the Gospel. Christianity isn’t (or shouldn’t be used as) a cultural/political solution to Islam or secularism, it is (or should be) a response to Jesus and how he reconciled us wayward humans to God. …. The subtitle of the article explains all "Atheism can't equip us for civilisational war". Hirsi Ali doesn't seem to believe in the resurrection, the Trinity or the need for salvation in Jesus. In fact she seems to be returning to the Islam of her youth minus the nasty bits. What she's doing isn't becoming a Christian, she's joining the Christian team because she thinks it's more capable of fighting against Islam. …. …. She doesn't even mention Jesus once in that long essay for why she converted. Instead, she presents it all as wanting to join the winning team in a civilizational conflict because she married a far right ultranationalist and chauvenist [sic] who is literally a Scottish lord. …. Whatever about all that, could one confidently follow Hildebrand’s presumably well-intentioned version of Jesus as the Saviour upon whom one ought to base one’s life? Jesus Christ as Superstar Joe Hildebrand has written glowingly of Jesus Christ Superstar in The Sat. Telegraph: I was going to write about so many things this Saturday, but then I went to the opening night of Jesus Christ Superstar and now I can’t think about anything else. First, let’s just get the housekeeping out of the way - it’s a ball-tearing banger of a show. Cancel your plans, abandon your family and get on it. That is literally what Jesus would have wanted. We don’t talk about religion much in Australia. We do it, but we don’t talk about it. Even when great clashes emerge - such as the tragically recurrent self-destruction of Israel and Palestine - we disguise religion as politics, as though they are the same thing. They are not, and that is why we fail. And so countless UN resolutions propose endless and meaningless diplomatic and technocratic pathways to peace that have no end or meaning to those who are standing in the way of it. Meanwhile, there is the sorrowful loneliness of the poor old folk in the middle who will get obliterated by the bombs of both sides as they wonder in their final moments why we can’t all just get along. We can’t. As long as there is fanaticism and ideology and fundamentalism, we just can’t. Not to be too much of a Negative Nancy about it, but yes, everyone will die. This is hardly hysteria - on the contrary, it is literally happening right now. The only question is why and how to stop it. For Joe Hildebrand, Jesus can point out for us the path to peace. For the answer, let’s turn to Jesus. Both in the Bible and in the mountains of historiography about the most famous man on Earth, there is a mass of penetrating insights, confounding contradictions and soul-turning moments of inspiration. The reason for all of this is Jesus himself. He was notoriously oblique. He spoke in parables instead of dictates. He was a pragmatist in the face of radicals. And in the octane-fuelled world of Roman-occupied Jerusalem, he preached peace instead of revolution - perhaps upsetting Judas. Just pay your taxes to Caesar, he said. It hardly mattered anyway because the kingdom of God was at hand. As it turned out, the kingdom would be a long time coming. While most of what Joe Hildebrand has written here does not concern me overmuch, and I would agree with some of it, what follows this suggests a Jesus, who - while apparently impressing our journalist - strikes me as being one who did not know if he was Arthur or Martha – or, to put it more in context, did not know if he were Coming of Going. Joe Hildebrand continues: It is clear from the New Testament alone that Jesus expected a huge and imminent metaphysical deliverance that failed to materialise and that scared and confused early Christians scrambled to make sense of this. But here is the rub. Despite his repeated predictions that the new kingdom was at hand, Jesus constantly demanded that his followers give their money to the poor and embrace the socially despised; that they love their neighbours as themselves and do unto others as they would have done unto them; that they turn the other cheek in times of violence and - in times of judgment - they not commit the ultimate hypocrisy by casting the first stone. This to me is the most beautiful paradox of Christianity. It at once says that nothing matters in this life, only the next, and at the same time says we must care for people in the here and now. …. Joe Hildebrand will continue on to make some other worthwhile observations about the world and peace for the remainder of his article. It is just that section: “It is clear from the New Testament alone that Jesus expected a huge and imminent metaphysical deliverance that failed to materialise and that scared and confused early Christians scrambled to make sense of this”, that really worries me. It suggests that Jesus and his followers had not grasped in what times they were living. For what follows, let us take Mark 13, because this was the version that was read at Mass a day or two ago (today being the 19th November, 2024). Note that Jesus says at the end of this section that “all of these things”, these extraordinary things listed in the text, will have occurred before the end of the present generation, the generation that He was then physically addressing. This is a point that Joe Hildebrand has, in his article, completely missed and misunderstood. And I suspect that most of us today have, too. As Jesus was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, ‘Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!’ ‘Do you see all these great buildings?’ replied Jesus. ‘Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down’. As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John and Andrew asked him privately, ‘Tell us, when will these things happen? And what will be the sign that they are all about to be fulfilled?’ Jesus said to them: ‘Watch out that no one deceives you. Many will come in my name, claiming, ‘I am he,’ and will deceive many. When you hear of wars and rumors of wars, do not be alarmed. Such things must happen, but the end is still to come. Nation will rise against nation, and kingdom against kingdom. There will be earthquakes in various places, and famines. These are the beginning of birth pains. ‘You must be on your guard. You will be handed over to the local councils and flogged in the synagogues. On account of me you will stand before governors and kings as witnesses to them. And the Gospel must first be preached to all nations. Whenever you are arrested and brought to trial, do not worry beforehand about what to say. Just say whatever is given you at the time, for it is not you speaking, but the Holy Spirit. ‘Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child. Children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death. Everyone will hate you because of me, but the one who stands firm to the end will be saved. ‘When you see ‘the abomination that causes desolation’ standing where it does not belong—let the reader understand—then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let no one on the housetop go down or enter the house to take anything out. Let no one in the field go back to get their cloak. How dreadful it will be in those days for pregnant women and nursing mothers! Pray that this will not take place in winter, because those will be days of distress unequaled from the beginning, when God created the world, until now—and never to be equaled again. ‘If the Lord had not cut short those days, no one would survive. But for the sake of the elect, whom he has chosen, he has shortened them. At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Messiah!’ or, ‘Look, there he is!’ do not believe it. For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. So be on your guard; I have told you everything ahead of time. ‘But in those days, following that distress, “the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from the sky, and the heavenly bodies will be shaken”. ‘At that time people will see the Son of Man coming in clouds with great power and glory. And he will send his angels and gather his elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of the heavens. ‘Now learn this lesson from the fig tree: As soon as its twigs get tender and its leaves come out, you know that summer is near. Even so, when you see these things happening, you know that it is near, right at the door. Truly I tell you, this generation will certainly not pass away until all these things have happened. Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will never pass away’. For a very clear explanation of what Jesus was talking about here, see the excellent commentary on it of Justin (as he simply calls himself) as presented in my recent article: Jesus in his Olivet Discourse was talking to his present generation (7) Jesus in his Olivet Discourse was talking to his present generation | Damien Mackey - Academia.edu

Jesus in his Olivet Discourse was talking to his present generation

“Clearly the “you” highlighted in all these verses is the disciples. Jesus was not talking to us here or any other future generation. He is clearly speaking to his disciples about events that were to occur in their lifetime, not events that would occur 2000 years (or more!) later”. Justin Taken from: https://thespiritsearches.com/this-generation-will-not-pass-away-until-all-these-things-take-place/#more-539 In regards to the Olivet Discourse, few verses have sparked more controversy than Matthew 24:34. Here Jesus states: “Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place” (ESV). But given the context of the preceding verses (i.e., wars, famines, earthquakes, persecutions, increased lawlessness, signs in heaven, etc.) how can this be? After all, these are the signs of the end, right? And if we were to interpret this verse literally then we would have to conclude that “this generation” refers to the one to whom Jesus was speaking to, that is, his contemporaries. And that they would be the generation to witness “all these things” – “all these things” being everything Jesus had mentioned up to that point. But if what Jesus was speaking about referred to signs that would precede the end of the world, how could this be? Surely there are none from that generation alive today to witness the end. To assume so would be absurd. So what exactly did Jesus mean by “this generation”? Who was he talking about? And what about “all these things” that he said would occur before “this generation” passed away? The truth is, I’ve already answered the question. “This generation” refers to the one whom Jesus was speaking to, that is, his contemporaries. It was they who were to witness “all these things” that he had spoken about previously. Consequently, “this generation” is not in reference to a specific race (the Jews), a type of people (righteous or wicked), or a future generation to come. Neither do the signs and events spoken of by Jesus (which he summarizes as “all these things”) serve as nearness indicators of any eschatological event in our future including the Rapture, the Second Coming, the end times, or even the end of the world itself. This explanation, although contrary to the one most commonly employed when explaining the Olivet Discourse, is not without significant evidence to support it. In this article I’ll present the case for the preteristic view of Matthew 24:34 and hopefully help shed some light on such a controversial verse in Scripture. Lets start by defining the term “generation”. The Meaning of “This Generation” The definition of generation according to the Merriam Websters Collegiate Dictionary 11th Edition is: a group of individuals born and living contemporaneously. Not surprisingly, the Greek word used for “generation” in Matthew 24:34 is “genea” which refers to the whole multitude of men living at the same time. It is true that “genea” can sometimes be used in reference to a nation or race but “of the 38 appearances of ‘genea’ apart from Luke 21:32 / Matthew 24:34 / Mark 13:30, all have the temporal meaning, primarily that of contemporaries” (A.J. Mattill Jr. – Luke and the Last Things) The fact that Jesus used the word “genea” in conjunction with the near demonstrative “this” (this generation) clearly indicates that it was his contemporaries who would see “all these things”. Other instances of Jesus using “genea” to refer to his contemporaries include: • Matthew 11:16 – To what can I compare this generation? They are like children sitting in the marketplaces and calling out to others • Matthew 12:41 – The men of Nineveh will stand at the judgment with this generation and condemn it • Matthew 12:42 – The Queen of the South will rise at the judgment with this generation and condemn it • Matthew 12:45 – So will it be with this wicked generation • Matthew 23:36 – Truly I tell you, all these things will come upon this generation In each of these verses (although there are many more) we easily understand that Jesus was referring to those living during his time. Why then at Matthew 24:34 do we attempt to force the word to mean something it most often doesn’t instead of allowing for its most natural use? Throughout the Gospels “genea” is the word Jesus uses to refer to his contemporaries. To assert that he now uses the word to refer to a nation, race, type of people, or a future generation is more than highly unlikely. Its [sic] essentially impossible given the context in which he’s speaking and the audience to whom he’s speaking to. Which brings us to the next two points: who was Jesus speaking to and what was Jesus talking about? Who Was Jesus Speaking To? Matthew 24:3 tells us that Jesus was speaking to his disciples, privately, on the Mount of Olives during the Olivet Discourse. More specifically, we know these disciples to have been Peter, James, John, and Andrew according to Mark 13:3. Why is it important that we know this? Because without identifying the original audience of the Olivet Discourse (or any written work for that matter) it becomes nearly impossible to interpret it accurately. If we don’t know to, or for whom something was written, then any potential reader may assume the work was written for them, thus taking it out of context. Such has been the case with the Olivet Discourse and the many colorful interpretations given in an attempt to explain it. Lets [sic] take a look at some verses within the Olivet Discourse that help remove any doubt as to who Jesus was speaking to, and therefore, who would witness “all these things”. • v.4 – And Jesus answered them, “See that no one leads you astray • v.6 – And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars. See that you are not alarmed • v.9 – Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and put you to death, and you will be hated by all nations for my name’s sake’ • v.15 – So when you see the abomination of desolation • v.23 – Then if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There he is!’ do not believe it • v.25 – See, I have told you beforehand • v.26 – So, if they say to you, ‘Look, he is in the wilderness,’ do not go out • v. 32-33 – From the fig tree learn its lesson: as soon as its branch becomes tender and puts out its leaves, you know that summer is near. So also, when you see all these things, you know that he is near, at the very gates • v. 34 – Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place Clearly the “you” highlighted in all these verses is the disciples. Jesus was not talking to us here or any other future generation. He is clearly speaking to his disciples about events that were to occur in their lifetime, not events that would occur 2000 years (or more!) later. So for us to properly understand who “this generation” is, we have to understand how the disciples would have understood Jesus’s words. Can it be realistically assumed that when Jesus told the disciples that “they will deliver you up to persecution and death and you will be hated by all nations for my names sake” that they would have understood him to mean somebody other than themselves? Or can it be realistically assumed that when Jesus told them “this generation will not pass away until all these things take place” that they understood him to mean some other generation than the one then in existence? In both cases the answer is no. Jesus was perfectly clear in his announcement of which generation would experience “all these things”. Think about it. What else could Jesus have said to clarify of whom he was speaking? And from the disciples perspective, why would any further clarification be needed? He was speaking to them in response to their questions concerning the destruction of the Temple (more on this to come). No doubt they would have rightly understood everything Jesus spoke of as pertaining to them. They had no reason to think that what Jesus said pertained to any other generation other than their own or that he was referring to events that were to occur thousands of years in the future. To them, no clarification was needed. They knew they were the ones, and theirs the generation, to witness “all these things”. Unfortunately, faulty interpretations run rampant in regards to the Olivet Discourse, and specifically in relation to “this generation”. …. Summarizing “This Generation” Only through much manipulation can one come to interpret “this generation” as meaning anything other than “this generation”, that is, the one alive during Jesus’s day. All three Gospel accounts of the Olivet Discourse concur and allow no deviation in the interpretation of Jesus’s words here, whereas other verses of the Olivet Discourse vary slightly. For example, Matthew 24:15 says: “So when you see the abomination of desolation spoken of by the prophet Daniel, standing in the holy place (let the reader understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains“, whereas Lukes account (21:20-21) says: “But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation has come near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains”. The wording used by each writer is obviously different, although both are referring to the same event. However, in all three of the synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, & Luke) the writers use the same exact phrase (essentially verbatim) at this point in their record of Jesus’s words, suggesting that there was no room for interpretative differences nor any need to reword what Jesus said for clarification purposes. • Matthew 24:34 – Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. • Mark 13:30 – Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place. • Luke 21:32 – Truly, I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all has taken place. ________________________________________ …. Throughout the rest of this article we’re going to discuss what the Olivet Discourse was actually about. We’ll discover what prompted Jesus to have this discussion in the first place, and we’ll look at the text leading up to the verse in question. This will not be a verse by verse commentary, but rather a general overview highlighting specific texts that are vital to understanding who “this generation” was and what “all these things” actually refer to. What Was the Olivet Discourse Actually About? In order to fully understand who “this generation” was and what “all these things” refers to, we have to understand what the Olivet Discourse was about to begin with. To interpret a verse of Scripture without first understanding the context in which its written almost always leads to a faulty interpretation. Such is the case with the modern futurist approach to the Olivet Discourse which says “this generation” refers to a future generation and they will be the ones who witness “all these things”. …. In short, however, the Olivet Discourse is about the destruction of the Jewish Temple and the city of Jerusalem itself, both of which occurred in the Jewish War between AD 67-70. Within 40 years of Jesus giving these prediction [sic] on the Mount of Olives, the events he spoke of came to pass. Truly “this generation” to whom Jesus was speaking witnessed “all these things” he spoke of during his discourse. …. Leading up to the Olivet Discourse In Matthew 23 we read of Jesus’s scathing indictment against the religious leaders of his day. In his unrelenting assault Jesus proclaims them to be “full of hypocrisy and lawlessness” (v.28), and like “whitewashed tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but within are full of dead peoples bones and all uncleanness” (v.27). He goes on to point out that they are the “sons of those who murdered the prophets” and tells them to “fill up then the measure of your fathers” (v.31-32). He goes on to tell them how he will send them “prophets and wise men and scribes, some of whom you will kill and crucify, and some you will flog in your synagogues, and persecute from town to town” (v.34). Notice here the similarity between what Jesus says the religious leaders will do to those whom he sends and what he tells his disciples will happen to them in the next chapter (Matthew 24:9-12). He then says, “so that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on earth…Truly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation” (Matthew 23:35-36). Sound familiar? Here we see Jesus pronouncing judgement upon that generation, holding them responsible for “all the righteous blood shed on earth”. Why? Because he knew that they were going to be the ones to kill him, the Messiah. There could be no blood more righteous than his, and his murder at their hands would serve as the final nail in the coffin leading up to their judgement. In murdering their own Messiah, they would truly “fill up the measure of their fathers”. Jesus then laments over Jerusalem, for he knows how devastating its destruction will be. He then says, “See, your house is left to you desolate” (Matthew 23:38), in reference to the Temples pending destruction. Here Jesus borrows language from the Old Testament. Daniel 9:17 says, “Now therefore, O our God, listen to the prayer of your servant and to his pleas for mercy, and for your own sake, O Lord, make your face to shine upon your sanctuary, which is desolate”. …. Jesus Departs the Temple and Predicts its Destruction The Olivet Discourse begins with Jesus’s departure from the Temple followed by the disciples pointing out to him how beautiful it was. Luke’s account says that “some were speaking of the temple, how it was adorned with noble stones and offerings” (Luke21:5). Mark’s account records the disciples as a bit more enthusiastic in their observation: “Look, Teacher, what wonderful stones and what wonderful buildings!” (Mark 13:1). This enthusiasm, however, is short lived as Jesus’s response is far from comforting concerning their beloved Temple. He says, “Do you see these great buildings? There will not be left here one stone upon another that will not be thrown down” (Mark 13:2). From here, Jesus departs to the Mount of Olives where his disciples come to him privately and ask for more details concerning what he had just said. Matthews account reads as follows: “As he sat on the Mount of Olives, the disciples came to him privately, saying, ‘Tell us, when will these things be, and what will be the sign of your coming, and of the end of the age?” (Matthew 24:3). These questions are in response to what Jesus said about the Temple being destroyed. Consequently, his reply is in response to those questions. Everything Jesus says from this point forward is in response to the disciples questions about when the Temple will be destroyed and the signs which are to precede its destruction (See Mark 13:4 and Luke 21:7). This is how we know that the Olivet Discourse is not about the end of the world. Nor are the signs and events it describes to be witnessed by any other generation than the one alive at the time of Jesus’s prophecy. ….