By Walid Shoebat (Shoebat Sunday Special)
Imagine the shocker when you think that you have prophecy all figured out to only find out that you missed that one crucial word which crumbles not just your understanding of prophecy, but your entire theology. Next time you run into someone who acts as if they figured it all out when they throw a verse or two at you, have them do a search of these nine lethal words in the Bible which renders their entire theology, modern commentaries they use, historic revisions and centuries of reformation theology to become completely obsolete.
What you are about to read will blow you away:
THE FIRST LETHAL WORD IN PSALM 132: "AND"
You might consider the word "and" insignificant until you run into Psalm 132 when David says that the Ark of the Covenant is assumed to heaven with God:
"Go up Lord, to the place of your rest [heaven], you and the ark of your might!". (Psalm 132:8)
Do you see this "and"? This one word alone renders countless interpretations, books, websites, reformations and commentaries that claim that the Ark is Christ becomes worthless.
None of these commentaries can answer a simple Jesus-style question: how do you paint the Ark as symbolic of Jesus if both, this Ark and Jesus went up to heaven?
This word "and" leaves no room to maneuver. The only option is that God assumed into heaven a literal box called "the Ark of the Covenant".
But this is impossible, especially when Revelation 21:2–3 declares that "the dwelling place of God is with man." God in heaven does not dwell with a box anymore. That plus the whole context of the Book of Hebrews and Jeremiah 3:16 was that God was done with such things.
Some might argue that this prophecy pertains to the literal Ark and that David is simply going together with the Ark to the Temple in Jerusalem's Mount Zion.
But this too is impossible. The text clearly puts this matter to rest:
"Because Lord Jehovah is pleased in Zion and he chose it a dwelling place. This is my rest to an eternity of eternities; here I shall sit because I desired it.”
There is no question this is the heavenly not earthly Mount Zion where the Ark resides. The Bible even confirms this:
And the temple of God was opened in heaven, and there was seen in his temple the ark of his testament (Revelation 11:19)
Is this mount Zion on earth? Never.
But it even gets better when we examine translations of Psalms 132:8 from the Septuagint:
Arise, O Lord, into thy resting place: thou and the ark, which thou hast sanctified [made holy, sinless]. (Psalm 132:8)
All this leaves us with only one option: the Ark is not Christ or a box but the Woman Who housed Christ in her womb.
Why then would it make any sense to accept the Ark-Box and reject the Ark-Mother?
Even the first living savior of Israel, Moses, came in an "ark" (Exodus 2:5) and in Noah's day, who mocked his mighty Ark where the ones consumed by the flood.
How one can find truth is simple: see what the world abhors the most and you will find what God loves the most. God sent angels to the most abhorred of society, poor shepherds, and chose to be born in a lowly place: Bethlehem.
But within the same Psalm lays more lethal words no one pays attention to:
THE SECOND AND THIRD LETHAL WORDS IN PSALM 132 ARE "EPHRATAH" AND "YA'AR"
Protestant commentaries are mystified about this Psalm since the Ark was never placed in Bethlehem. But the text insists it was in a strange place called "Ya'ar":
"Lo, we heard of it [the Ark] at [Bethlehem] Ephratah: we found it in the fields of Ya'ar" (Psalm 132:6)
Hearing about the Ark being in "Ephratah" and then discovering about it in "Ya'ar" is unheard of. Scholars attempt to solve the riddle. Barnes Notes is stunned:
"There is no mention in the history of the fact that the ark was "heard of" at Ephrata, or that it was ever there. The name Ephrata - אפרתה 'ephrâthâh - is applied".
Then Cambridge Bible links Kiriath-jearim as this "Ephrathah" and that "Ya'ar" is in the neighbourhood of Kiriath-jearim where the Ark had rested for many years in the house of Abinadab (1 Samuel 7:1-2).
But this is impossible, Kiriath-jearim is way too far north of Jerusalem and it is not Ephratah. That plus Kiriath-jearim is on a hill where the text strictly says that Ya'ar is in the "Fields of Ya'ar" a field not a hill.
In fact, what most do not know is that Psalm 132 was speaking of the angelic annunciation of the birth of the Savior according to Luke's gospel. During my youth I spent all my summers in the Fields of Ya'ar which was known from the time of St. Helena who marked it.
I shall show with pin-point accuracy that it was Mary (not a box) Who finally rested in Bethlehem Ephratah to give birth. The moment the child was born at the dawning of the day, the angels pronounced this birth at the fields of Ya'ar.
This place was known throughout history as the Fields of the Shepherds (Shepherd's Fields).
This is where an angelic host announced to the shepherds instructing them at dawn (when it was still dark) to go up to Bethlehem Ephratah to see the birth of Christ where they also found His Ark (Mary).
Today anyone can visit the village of Beit Sahar (House of the Dawn, my own birthplace) in the vicinity of Bethlehem to the east. Beit Sahar (today pronounced Beit Sahour) is just a stone throw east of the Nativity where Christ was born and where our clan Shoebat owned land. This can even be confirmed from the municipality of Beith Sahour:
This site is known locally as "Isyar" [Is-Yaar] and is located 1 km north of the Greek Orthodox Shepherds' Field ... over a cave in which it is believed the shepherds' lived.
Here's a tour where you can see the the wooded area just as the text demands "fields of the woods" including the caves of the Shepherds:
But the name of this place today has a prophetic significance since the Ark was carried at the Dawn in Hebrew is "Sahar" (to stay up till the Dawn) signifying the victory over Israel's enemies when Joshua went roundabout at Dawn circumambulating around Jericho seven times as the text states: "they rose early, at the dawn of day, and marched around the city in the same manner seven times" (Joshua 6:15).
But this time, this Ark (Mary) signified victory over sin and at dawn, while still dark, victory was announced at the Fields of Ya'ar because Christ was announced to the Shepherds "we heard of it at Bethlehem" in the Field of Yaar, translated as 'Field of the Forrest'. The King James renders it this way: "Lo, we heard of it at Ephrathah: we found it in the fields of the woods." We from Bethlehem can even pin-point it. Its the only little forestry area in the Fields of the Shepherds in Beit Sahour, Bethlehem-Ephratah.
Artwork at Is-yaar (the Forrest Field, Shepherd's Fields) commemorating the very spot the angels came to announce the birth of Christ by St. Mary (the Ark) in Bethlehem
The place was marked by St. Helena the mother of the future Emperor Constantine the Great (reigned 306–337). In the fifth century a Byzantine monastery at the forrest woods of (Ya'ar) we find a Franciscan chapel and a cave where the Shepherd's would stay at which I attended daily during summer at the nearby YMCA as a member of the Young Men's Christian Association (I've been destined to become "Christian").
Ya'ar means 'forrest' and the name still stands "Esh-Yaar" (IsYaar) just as our village municipality renders the name which is preserved till today and is known since St. Helena as the place where the Shepherds heard of Mary [the Ark] being in Bethlehem Ephratah and discovered about it in the fields of Ya'ar. Esh-Yaar would mean the Fire of Yaar David's mighty warrior from Bethlehem.
The names passed down by tradition, the archeological site and its history makes a compelling case this is speaking of Mary giving birth to Christ. By this, Psalms 132 becomes a prophecy regarding the announcement of the birth of the savior, something no modern commentary even considers. But once Psalm 132 is cross-referenced with the rest of scripture it becomes a compelling case that the Ark was Mary and now the Apocalypse becomes clear as we shall see.
But there is even more, Psalm 132 speaks of Mary's womb as this Ark.
THE FOURTH LETHAL WORD IN PSALM 132: "WOMB"
But Psalm 132 even packs more secrets, something no modern commentary even considers. It declares the Ark bringing forth the Messiah will be coming from "David's womb" and not "David's loins" as Protestant bibles translate. Author and expert, Fr Christopher P. Kelley, DD brought to my attention the major mistranslation in Psalm 132:11:
"The LORD hath sworn in truth unto David; he will not turn from it; Of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne." (Psalm 132:11 KJV)
But the Hebrew word they translate as "body" is "Beten" (Womb) and since men do not have wombs they translated it "of the fruit of thy body," or "of the fruit of thy loins".
Only the Catholic Douay Rheims translates it correctly:
"The Lord hath sworn truth to David, and he will not make it void: of the fruit of thy womb I will set upon thy throne." (Psalm 132:11, in DRB is 131:11)
But again, the Hebrew word they translated for 'body' or 'loins' is "Beten" which can only mean "womb".
Beten can never mean "body" or "loins"! Impossible. Not in a million years.
The verse mystified translators. Even Strong's could not escape it explaining that Beten is "the belly," "especially the womb" "as they are born, within, womb" "being female member" yet they apply the wrong translation.
But Beten here is "womb"
Anti-Catholic translators wanted nothing to do with a Psalm that revealed the Ark had a literal womb.
The verse was not speaking of a descendant in the male line, but in the female line.
Next time you talk about the 'lying media' think of the 'lying commentaries' and the 'lying translations' most run to for the womb of their comfort.
No modern commentary can escape this lethal flaw. Throughout scripture when it came to men, God used "loins": "kings shall come out of thy loins" (Genesis 35:11), "thy son that shall come forth out of thy loins" (1 Kings 8:19), "For he was yet in the loins of his father, when Melchisedec met him" (Hebrews 7:10), "thy son that shall come forth out of thy loins" (1 Kings 1:19) ...
And when it came to women God usually used "womb": "And the LORD said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb" (Genesis 25:23), "he opened her womb: but Rachel was barren" (Genesis 29:31), "loved Hannah: but the LORD had shut up her womb" (1 Samuel 1:5), "of my mother's womb" (Job 1:21) ...
Except of course only when it came to Psalms 132, God strictly used womb only for King David because this was the virgin birth and is why the ancient Jews recognized this and translated "virgin" instead of "maiden".
Now the prophecy is not only the announcement of the birth of Messiah by Mary, but it is also a prophecy of the virgin birth and the assumption of Mary that so many reject.
The Septuagint which was held by Jews at the time to be "more inspired" than the Hebrew text, because of the miracle of its translation by devout men empowered by the Holy Spirit translated Beten correctly as "womb". These added depth and specificity to the prophecy of Isaiah and in the Psalms to indicate a virgin birth and is why St. Jerome translating from the Septuagint to the Latin Vulgate had no issue with writing "she shall crush your head".
The NETS translation of the book of Psalms based primarily on the edition of Alfred Rahlfs, Psalmi cum Odis from the Septuagint is another good translation of the Psalms which even pronounces the names as I am accustomed to in Bethlehem where David is properly pronounced Dauid (Dawid). Most are unaware that the sixth letter of the Hebrew alphabet is a "w/u" and not a "v":
The Lord swore to Dauid [Dawid] the truth, and he will never annul it: “Of your belly’s fruit I will set on your throne." (Psalms 132:11 NETS)
Here too it is not 'loins', the Hebrew Beten (womb) is very clear. For centuries even King David's name is mispronounced.
Even Elizabeth’s famous description of Mary’s son Jesus in Luke 1:42, it says: “the fruit of thy womb” which perfectly matches the Septuagint version in Psalm 132:11:
ὁ καρπὸς τῆς κοιλίας σου—Luke 1:42 "blessed is the fruit of thy womb" (to Mary)
ἐκ καρποῦ τῆς κοιλίας σου—Psalm 132:11 LXX "of the fruit of thy womb" (to David)
This is why Mary sang a psalm of praise to God. This would have been Psalm 132. This is why in Revelation 11:19 the Ark of the Covenant is seen in God's temple and then immediately following (Rev 12:1) it describes a pregnant woman clothed with the sun and moon under her feet.
And since David has no womb, signifying a virgin birth of a Messiah born of a daughter of David, an Ark that is 'sanctified' (sinless) and while a box-ark never rested in Bethlehem, but that a virgin gave birth in Bethlehem, to even hint at the angelic announcement in Luke and then this Virgin (Ark) is assumed to heaven as a separate being from the Messiah, makes Psalm 132 to be the most significant messianic prophecy in the entire scripture.
Yet no Protestant quotes it. None.
The laws of probability would make it impossible to have all this by mere chance. I did not convert to Catholicism easily. It took years worth of struggle and much painstaking digging for wells in the Word of God. In the end I found wells.
The ancient translators of the Septuagint where not Catholic either, but they knew better and is probably why they translated Almah (maiden) as "virgin" in Isaiah since they linked the seed of the woman (not man) with Psalm 132:11 'a womb of David's descendant'.
All this explains why when it comes to Genesis 3:15 Catholics are content with the following: ‘I will put enmity between your seed [Satan] and the seed of the woman [Eve]. She will crush your head [Mary] and you will strike her heel.’
But Scripture reveals that the crushing of Satan’s head is through Christ. However, King David lodged a stone pellet into Goliath's head and while ultimately this was brought about by the power of Jesus it is likewise done through Mary David's descendant.
In a sense, God is saying to Satan, “while you thought you triumphed over a woman [Eve], it is through a woman [Mary – the New Eve] that I will crush your head” and is why the Old Testament includes stories of women who foreshadow this head-crushing blow ; Judith 13:4-9 we read of Judith cutting off Holofernes’s head, Judges 4:21 Jael kills Sisera by driving a tent peg through his temple; Judges 9: 50–55 Abimelech is killed when a woman drops a millstone on his head.
Just one word "Beten" renders all translations except the Septuagint as 'found wanting'.
Mary is of David. This cannot be denied. As Fr. Kelley elaborated:
"None can say that St Irenaeus did not know the Scriptures! The "New Shoot" from the "stump of Jesse" is through David's son, Nathan. None from that line had ever sat upon the Throne of Daivd in Jerusaelm. Maryam's line from David is through Nathan (- named for the Prophet who caught David in his sin)! (Lk. 3:31) "Heli" appears to be a "nickname" form of Joachim, her father, who is thus the "father-in-law" of Joseph (cf. Lk 3:23). Of course, St Elizabeth declared, "blessed is the Fruit of thy Womb" to Maryam, when she came to visit (Lk 1:42). She then uses an expression that will escape many who do not understand the Jewish reverence for the Sacred Name: "Why is this [privilege] granted to me that the Mother of my LORD should come to me?" (1:43) A Jew of that time would never use the term, "LORD", except for God. Elizabeth is declaring plainly that MARYAM is the MOTHER OF GOD, come in the Flesh, within her Womb. [See also 2Sam.6:9 - where David asks a similar question -- in reverent fear!] Maryam stays "three months" in the home of the priest Zachariah & his wife Elizabeth (certainly long enough to care for her in childbirth, and attend St John's Circumcision). (Lk 1:56)
This fulfills the prefiguration when David put the Ark of the Covenant aside in the home of Obed-Edom (a Levitical priest) for three months (2Sam.6:11). All could see that the home of Obed-Edom was "Blessed" by the Presence of the Ark. Then David no longer feared the Ark, but proceeded -- with more care this time -- to take it up to Jerusalem.
The Ark contained three things (Hebrews 9:4): The Jar of Manna (Bread of Heaven), Aaron's Rod (Sign of High Priesthood), & Tables of the Law (God's Word written by His Finger on Stone). Now Maryam's Womb contained Him Who Is the Bread of Heaven, the Great High Priest, & the Word of God made Flesh."
And the first Christians completely understood Psalm 132. Gregory the Wonder Worker (c. 213–c. 270) wrote:
"Let us chant the melody that has been taught us by the inspired harp of David, and say, ‘Arise, O Lord, into thy rest; thou, and the ark of thy sanctuary.’ For the Holy Virgin is in truth an ark, wrought with gold both within and without, that has received the whole treasury of the sanctuary" (Homily on the Annunciation to the Holy Virgin Mary).
All this combined is the accurate interpretation instead of what came in the 19th century attributing the Ark to strictly portray Christ. No, it is St. Mary Who housed the Christ, the Manna from heaven, the Great High Priest and the Word of God made Flesh.
God does not operate in a vacuum. The Ark was the womb containing Jesus, the bread of life come down from heaven (John 6:41) God is about life and not boxes. Man can only make boxes while only God can become man.
Someone is out to deceive the world alluding that the Ark is strictly symbolic of Christ. They painted the Ark as if it signified deity and by that they inadvertently sanctified and even deified Mary while they accused the only remaining two lampstands; the Catholics and Orthodox of the very thing they themselves were guilty of: the worship of Mary.
All the talk of the Ark being "acacia wood [which] symbolized our Lord’s humanity. The gold overlay denoted His deity" is simply that the wood symbolized our Mother's humanity and the gold overlay denoted her purity not being prone to sin.
Today only two poles carry her; one Orthodox and the other Catholic. These are the only two who can enter the temple, participate in the perpetual sacrifice and are measured for testing and persecution while all others who are in the outer court are given to Antichrist to tread under foot.
Remember, there is no longer a physical temple and all prophecy that speaks of the temple speak of the true church in the altar.
The Virgin Mary is the living shrine of the Word of God, Christ. Therefore, she is the Ark of the New and Eternal Covenant. The problem with most modern interpretation of prophecy is their ignorance on the nature of dual fulfillments regarding the same prophecies or the application regarding typology.
Pay close attention: prior to Christ's coming, we must take a literal approach to a literal temple with everything in it, but after Christ we take a typological approach to everything temple with everything in it to be applied to people. God in heaven dwells with people: "the dwelling place of God is with man (Revelation 21:2–3)
Christ redefined the temple to be built on a different foundation which stems from Him to the apostles and prophets before them with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit. (Ephesians 2:20-22) This key is also explained in Hebrews 9.
Therefore, the Ark is no longer a box. This was clear throughout Christian history until the 19th century. Athanasius of Alexandria (c. 296–373) was the main defender of the deity of Christ against the second-century heretics:
"O noble Virgin, truly you are greater than any other greatness. For who is your equal in greatness, O dwelling place of God the Word? To whom among all creatures shall I compare you, O Virgin? You are greater than them all O [Ark of the] Covenant, clothed with purity instead of gold! You are the ark in which is found the golden vessel containing the true manna, that is, the flesh in which divinity resides" (Homily of the Papyrus of Turin).
But then the Ark reappears in Heaven as Psalm 132 declared it was assumed to heaven. The Woman clothed with the sun (Revelation 12) has all to do with what makes Mary the Ark of the New Covenant, the New Temple which is measured (tested).
Ever wonder why the whole context of Revelation 11-12 deals with persecution and the measuring (testing) of the earthly temple of God which is the Church? But what is this testing all about? Who is to be tested (persecuted) and who is not to be tested (not persecuted)?
Therefore, these chapters divide who is to be of Christ and who is to be of Antichrist.
And we find this theme throughout Daniel and the Apocalypse the true Christians are being tested on how we deal with Communion "Daily Sacrifice". Yet this "Daily Sacrifice" was later on misapplied to a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. However, what follows from here will shock you beyond anything you have seen before:
THE FIFTH, SIXTH, SEVENTH AND EIGHTH LETHAL WORDS: "PERPETUAL" "HOST" "ROME" "GRAIN"
Daniel is strictly speaking of a perpetual sacrifice that is simply stopped and removed by allies of Antichrist. But who are these allies and who are his enemies? Enter another shocker:
Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him [the prince of the host] the perpetual [Hebrew ha tamid 'continual' sacrifice] was taken away, and the place of his sanctuary was cast down. And an host was given him against the perpetual sacrifice, [Hebrew ha tamid] by reason of transgression [related to rebellion against Christ's authority], and it [the host] cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced, and prospered [it grew to challenge the valid church]. (Daniel 8:11-12)
Who are these "host" of peoples who aid the Antichrist? And what is this "Daily Sacrifice"? And what is the transgression they commit?
First of all, the Hebrew usually translated for "daily" in "daily sacrifice" is "Tameed" which means "perpetual" as translated in the Septuagint:
"And from the time of the removal of the perpetual sacrifice, when the abomination of desolation shall be set up, [there shall be] a thousand two hundred and ninety days." (Daniel 12:11)
What is shocking about all this is that it points to a split within Christendom itself where one side follows the Antichrist and the other side fights the Antichrist. Pay close attention to who opposes Antichrist:
"And the galleys shall come upon him, and the Romans, and he shall be dealt a heavy blow."
This verse already sets his natural enemies as southern Europe the closest nations to Asia Minor. Today Erdogan of Turkey (just as Protestants who hate Rome) has already voiced his hatred towards the Vatican in Rome declaring a coming war between Cross and Crescent.
When Turkey invades Egypt the southern European states (Chittim which constitutes Italy, Spain and Greece) translated as "Romans" will deal Turkey a heavy blow defeating them. One can imagine the indignation against the Vatican. Therefore, scripture says that the alliances Antichsit will have is with:
"an host given him against the perpetual [sacrifice] and by reason of transgression [related to rebellion against Christ's authority, the Church], and it [the host] cast down the truth to the ground; and it practiced, and prospered [to stand against the Romans]. (Daniel 8:11-12)
So this 'host' of peoples deny and hates the 'daily sacrifice'.
But who else today but Protestants who daily issue anathemas accusing the Catholic "daily sacrifice" to be re-sacrificing Christ?
And which of the two are making a bigger fuss about Transubstantiation; Muslims or the Protestants?
Therefore, while Antichrist abolishes the Daily Sacrifice, he does it through this 'host' of peoples who ally with him: "and a host [are] given him [Antichrist] against the perpetual sacrifice and by reason of transgression ..."
By "reason of transgression" (sin) they are given to him because these did not repent to Christ through His ordinance. These believe that your sins are forgiven yesterday, today and forever and so they continue to sin and think nothing of it since they believe that they are forgiven already and therefore they are in sin "transgression".
But amazingly, the biblical text hits two demons in one stone when it exposes the enemy as well as it debunks the faulty accusation of 're-sacrificying Christ'.
Daniel uses ha-Tamid "the perpetual" [sacrifice] which is only used once in scripture in Daniel 12:11.
This makes many compelling arguments.
Tamid by itself conveys the concept of “never stopping,” “ceaseless” or “perpetual” exactly as Catholics and Orthodox define the Communion as a "perpetual sacrifice" and not just a memorial for remembrance.
But the text uses the Hebrew "Ha tamid". This is unique since it says that “the ceaseless” or “the perpetual” or “the never stopping” is a single magnificent sacrifice that never ceased from its inception.
This presents a lethal argument against Protestantism by a Jesus-style question: if this is re-instituted animal sacrifice in some third rebuilt temple, Christ by His crucifixion abolished animal sacrifices.
Since this sacrifice is in perpetuity (continuance of the same sacrifice) any other interpretation besides the Eucharist will only speed up the quicksand blender draining the argument into the trash bin of history.
And since this is a "sacrifice" the counterargument would then have to insist that Daniel 11 must then be strictly applied to Antiochus Epiphanies who fulfilled this prophecy in 168 BC when he desecrated the temple and stopped the sacrifices.
Again, Christ's crucifixion abolished temple sacrifices. One cannot even apply them to Titus for he too did not abolish sacrifices.
Any faulty interpretation besides the Eucharist would render Christ as the Antichrist for He too abolished temple sacrifices when He was crucified. Anyone who attempts to sway from the Eucharist as the only interpretation will inadvertently blaspheme Christ making Him Antichrist.
Try it. The puzzle is set in a way that there is no way out as we shall examine further.
Therefore, there is only one sacrifice that can fulfill this which is the perpetual (continuance) same sacrifice instituted by Christ.
This is the Eucharist no matter how one slices and dices the text.
Therefore, Antiochus is a type and the ultimate fulfillment is with Antichrist and never some rebuilt temple.
So this leaves no room to maneuver, the Jesus-style question then is: how do you explain a sacrificial system with "grain offering" that never ceased (perpetual)?
Scripture even pin-points who these anti-Eucharist go against, the Romans (the Catholics):
For the ships of Chittim [Romans] shall come against him [Antichrist]: therefore he shall be grieved, and return [retreat], and have indignation against the holy covenant: so shall he do; he shall even return, and have intelligence with them that forsake the holy covenant.
What we are dealing with here is pressure by Antichrist on the peoples who divided from the Roman Church which according to Daniel, these have 'transgressed' by rejecting God's authority established by Christ on earth in Rome when Peter and Paul established it and then Antichrist will work with the ones who forsook the "Holy Covenant" of the Romans.
The text clearly reveals a reaction to the Romans as Antichrist is angered at them and therefore he conspires against them by colluding with Rome's enemies, the Protestants and other Catholic/Orthodox Arab syncretists who departed from the faith and polluted the perpetual sacrifice of the mass as we already are beginning to see happening in the Middle East which we explained in detail here.
The whole crux of the struggle with Antichrist is summed up here:
"And such as do wickedly [syncretists, eugenists and Protestants] against the covenant shall he corrupt by flatteries: but the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits." (Daniel 11:32)
Wisdom 2 also gives much more detail on this issue which we already see forming in parts of Europe and elsewhere. This proves beyond doubt that the Church God established will remain steadfast but in patches and valleys and wilderness where the "woman is nourished" that is "her seed" the seed of Mary who cannot live without the Eucharist is fed the Eucharist in secret.
Christ established His church and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it and is why the text says:
"but the people that do know their God shall be strong, and do exploits".
Therefore, the falling away is not exclusively what we see happening from time to time in the Vatican but is also a departure from the faith protesting Vatican's authority, the Eucharist, the Church and Mary.
Transgressions are clearly to go against whom God ordained and it is not Geneva here that is mentioned but the very Rome that they so much hate. God will not destroy Rome but Mecca, the spiritual seat of Antichrist and He will destroy it by the hand of Antichrist (Isaiah 21, Revelation 13, Revelation 17).
Ever wonder why Protestants are taught that Rome is the Harlot?
These anti-Eucharist are the ones mentioned aiding Antichrist by instituting a prohibition against the "perpetual sacrifice" and is why it is always used with either the word “transgression” (pesha) or “abomination” (shiqquwts).
"Transgression” in all scripture always relates to rebellion against God’s authority, law and covenant.
This is why we find Daniel warning about breaking the covenant in the same context with the "Grain Offering".
What I just stated gets Protestants to cringe which is evidence that we defend and they continually attack. Who in the first place finagled the Word to make Rome harlot?
But we have the Word of God on our side. For in a million years they cannot remove the word "Chitim" who are the Romans who ordained the very Latin Mass we so much love. In the very Bible (they so much belabor about), it is Rome that is blessed and not Geneva. If they have an argument against us then let them find Geneva in the Bible while they cringe in anger. Rome is destined to be the "city of saints":
"To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints: Grace to you and peace from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ." (Romans 1:7)
Rome was "called to be saints" and this too is a grand prophecy.
The whole Word of God is prophetic and Rome produced more saints than any other city on earth, while Spain and New Spain were next, where Our Lady, the Ark of the Covenant, appeared and blessed New Spain (Mexico). And with the New Spain these produced more saints than any other after Rome.
Yet our enemies call this miracle in Mexico as 'demonic' forgetting that the healing of the soul is the healing of Christ for the divided haters accused Christ the same way Protestants accuse us:
But when the Pharisees heard this, they said, “It is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that this fellow drives out demons.” Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand. If Satan drives out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then can his kingdom stand? And if I drive out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your people drive them out? So then, they will be your judges. But if it is by the Spirit of God that I drive out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.
This too is prophetic. A kingdom divided cannot stand. This is true regardless that such divide happens to the Church or to the enemies of Christ.
But look at the accusation. When Christ does the miracle it is accused of being demonic. Ask them about the miracle of Our Lady of Guadalupe and they will instantly accuse it of bing demonic. But ask them to reproduce her miraculous image or the image on the Shroud of Turin and they will fail by adding more mockery.
It is indeed the story of Moses all over again and it gains global headlines when scientists carbon date the shroud to later on be baffled how they could never reproduce it and even later be baffled more when they discover their faulty evidence. So just as Moses was with the Hebrews confounding the pagans, Christ with us, the Emmanuel is still with us, even today confounding the scoffers.
And history with recurring prophecy proves this whole case we just explained here. Daniel’s people were in captivity because they had defied the covenant of the Sabath. In Malachi 1:10-11, God annulled the old sacrificial system and established a "pure grain offering" (Hebrew: Mincha). The mention of "grain offering" in the ancient Temple sacrifices is clearly in scripture, but a "pure grain offering" only exists once in Malachi and only pertains to including in and grafting in the Gentiles (the Church).
But Joel puts an end is to when these prophecies are fulfilled. It cannot be regarding Antiochus or Tutus or a rebuilt temple. Joel warns that prior to the day of the Lord that this grain offering will cease:
“The grain offering [Bread] and the drink offering [wine]. Have been cut off from the house of the Lord [the Temple]; The priests mourn, who minister to the Lord … Alas for the day! For the day of the Lord is at hand; It shall come as destruction from the Almighty.”
There is no escape, Joel specifically sets these prophecies to be fulfilled just prior to the Day of the Lord calling it "grain offering". This can never be about some historic event.
And with Daniel, the Little Horn will succeed in obtaining assistance from the Protestant world and by this you can see how the West is divided sheep from goat and wheat from tares "by reason of transgression” or “by transgression” (Hebrew: be’pasa).
This is a strong Hebrew word for rebellion against God. Contextually, once again, it is against God's authority, law and covenant of sacrifice and this is why "an host was given him against the continual [ha tamid] sacrifice". Daniel 8:13 as well reveals the enemy:
"then I heard a heavenly saint asking another heavenly saint "How long shall be the vision concerning the perpetual [sacrifice] and the transgression [rebellion against the covenant of sacrifice] of desolation, to give both the sanctuary and the host to be trodden under foot?”
We find this testing of the saints in Revelation 12 "measure the temple" (test it) and this 'host' in Daniel is the instrument of testing. This 'host' is to 'be trodden under foot' which Daniel 8:11 reveals the meaning:
“Yea, he magnified himself even to the prince of the host, and by him [the prince of the host] the daily sacrifice [ha tamid] was taken away"
This makes everything clear. This 'host' is the equation most ignore. It is the rebellious 'host of peoples'. This host is 'trodden under foot' (controlled by) Antichrist and are used by Antichrist. This host of peoples have a "prince" whom Antichrist magnifies himself as an equal to and it is this 'prince of the rebellious host' who will desecrate the sacrifice (Eucharist). It is this ally who will persecute the Christians mocking the Eucharistic Sacrifice.
THE NINTH LETHAL WORD: "ALTAR"
If Daniel is the prophet for the Jews and for the Church, John is the Prophet that mirrors him, but strictly for the Church. Daniel's prophecies cannot be interpreted in a vacuum unless one links it to another crucial prophecy in Revelation 11-12 where the temple is measured (tested) and here Antichrist is given the court that does not participate in the perpetual sacrifice. Remember, Temple in the New Testament is the Church. Having this in mind you can now easily decipher:
"And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and it was said to me: Arise, and measure [test] the temple of God, and the altar and them that adore therein. But the court, which is without the temple, cast out, and measure it not [do not test it through persecution]: because it is given unto the Gentiles [the Antichrist], and the holy city [the Jerusalem of God] they shall tread under foot two and forty months" (Revelation 11:1-2)
Everything fits. Like a glove. Daniel and John match. Keep in mind the rule of thumb; prior to Christ's coming, we must take a literal approach to a literal temple with everything in it, but after Christ we take a typological approach to everything temple with everything in it to be applied to people.
So the temple here is the Church, the entire Body of Christ here is measured (tested through persecution) by their participation in the proper covenant of sacrifice on an Altar "measure [test] the temple of God, and the altar and them that adore therein."
Who adores an "Altar"? Who adores the Eucharist? Are those the protestants?
What we see today is a mass exodus from the Eucharist. Catholics instead of participating in the Mass are doing another mass: a mass conversion to Protestantism.
In fact, this today constitutes one third of Christendom. Protestantism constitutes 800 million among approximately 2.4 billion Christians. Trim fat from meat it ends up the same: this would be 33%, a third, mostly in the U.S. and North Europe. And the scripture confirms:
"And his tail drew the third part of the stars of heaven, and cast them to the earth" (Revelation 12:4).
Stars of heaven here are who were considered brethren departing from their approach to heavenly Mount Zion. Remember "But you have come to [approach] Mount Zion, to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem. You have come to thousands upon thousands of angels in joyful assembly, to the church of the firstborn, whose names are written in heaven. You have come to God, the Judge of all, to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, to Jesus the mediator of a new covenant, and to the sprinkled blood that speaks a better word than the blood of Abel."
This is the "church of the firstborn" the primitive church whom they abandoned with it the supplications to saints and angels and also to Christ, the mediator.
These will tow the line of Antichrist. The "arms" and "host" who are with Antichrist are human forces.
And if fulfilled prophecy is the yardstick we can show proof:
"Antiochus' hosts confederate with the apostate Israelites; these latter attain the climax of guilt, when they not only, as before, "forsake the covenant" ( Dan 11:30 ), but "do wickedly against" it ( Dan 11:32), turning complete heathens. Here Antiochus' actings are described in language which reach beyond him the type to Antichrist the antitype [JEROME] "
But this will be fulfilled again in the church. These will be the ones not measured (tested) who are outside the Altar of Sacrifice (Eucharist). These are not part of the kingdom of Antichrist but are allied with him:
"And arms shall stand on his part [to his side], and they shall defile the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the continual sacrifice."
Islam is not as adamant about opposing the Eucharist as the Protestants. This is a sad reality which can easily be deduced by asking a Jesus-style question: provide the historic proof of what Muslims write opposing the Eucharist versus centuries of anti-Eucharist writing by Protestants?
I am not here attempting to dilute Islam's role, indeed, Islam is the religion of Antichrist and it would not mind prohibiting the practice of Christianity altogether, but when it comes to specifically the Eucharist, no enemy of Transubstantiation in their activism has matched the Protestants.
Even 1 John exposes that the acolytes of Antichrist stems from Christendom:
Children, it is the last hour! As you have heard that antichrist is coming, so now many antichrists have come. From this we know that it is the last hour. They went out from us, but they did not belong to us; for if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us. But by going out they made it plain that none of them belongs to us. 1 John 2:18-19
This proves a major divide. "They went out from us, but they did not belong to us" makes it clear its a departure, splitting away is from the original ancient church "for if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us". And all this is in the context of Antichrist.
Even Christ Himself, when He judges in Matthew 25 reveals this fact that we are no dealing with pagans. He is not judging heathens but separatists. Why else do they say "we healed in your name and cast devils ..."?
Yet He damns them because they either did nothing or participated in persecuting the true Church during the reign of Antichrist and is why He tells them of their persecutions: "just as you did it to the least of these My brethren you did it unto Me".
These, with Catholic accomplices, deeply rooted in the system will change the sacrifice and defile the sanctuary of strength-not only military strength, but chiefly the spiritual stronghold of the covenant-people. During Antiochus, Apollonius "polluted" it with altars to idols and sacrifices of swine's flesh, after having "taken away the daily sacrifice".
Novices speak of the Roman attack on Jerusalem in AD 70, under Titus as fulfillment, but nowhere is there any historical evidence that Titus did what Antiochus did.
But they do this to point at Rome. But there was no desecration of the altar inside the Holy of Holies by Rome or was there any abolition of a sacrificial system by Rome.
In fact it was the Romans who aided Israel to finally defeat and thwart Antiochus who ordered his general, Apollonius into Jerusalem on what he claimed was a peaceful mission (peace treaty) and when he was inside the city, they attacked the Jews on a Sabbath, when the Jews were reluctant to break the Sabbath covenant.
Isn't this what the Antichrist will do?
Ever wonder why seven books are removed from Protestant bibles? Protestants do not read the Roman–Jewish Treaty which was etched in scripture. It was an agreement made between Judas Maccabeus and the Roman Republic in 161 BC. According to 1 Maccabees 8:17-20 and Josephus, it was the first recorded conrtact between the Jewish people and the Romans. The treaty was signed during the Maccabean Revolt against the Greco-Syrian Seleucid kingdom. During this period, Rome's power and influence in the Hellenistic world was growing. Rome had recently humiliated the Seleucid King Antiochus IV by ordering his troops to leave Egypt, and had previously defeated his father Antiochus III in battle. After winning a number of victories and capturing Jerusalem, Judas Maccabeus sent two emissaries, Eupolemus son of John son of Accos and Jason son of Eleazar, to establish a treaty of friendship with the Roman Senate. This proposal was accepted and a treaty was signed.
According to I Maccabees chapter 8:
May all go well with the Romans and with the nation of the Jews at sea and on land forever, and may sword and enemy be far from them. If war comes first to Rome or to any of their allies in all their dominion, the nation of the Jews shall act as their allies wholeheartedly, as the occasion may indicate to them. To the enemy that makes war they shall not give or supply grain, arms, money, or ships, just as Rome has decided; and they shall keep their obligations without receiving any return. In the same way, if war comes first to the nation of the Jews, the Romans shall willingly act as their allies, as the occasion may indicate to them. And to their enemies there shall not be given grain, arms, money, or ships, just as Rome has decided; and they shall keep these obligations and do so without deceit. Thus on these terms the Romans make a treaty with the Jewish people. If after these terms are in effect both parties shall determine to add or delete anything, they shall do so at their discretion, and any addition or deletion that they may make shall be valid. Concerning the wrongs that King Demetrius is doing to them, we have written to him as follows:, 'Why have you made your yoke heavy on our friends and allies the Jews? If now they appeal again for help against you, we will defend their rights and fight you on sea and on land.'
And with God an agreement is an agreement. It is a covenant. History reveals and debunks all the false claims. Had Christ began a revolt against Rome, He would have broken the covenant with the Romans and this is another reason why God stood against the Jews on this one. It was Herod, an Edomite Jew who killed the children of Bethlehem Ephratah. Those who revolted against Rome also revolted against their God and Messiah where even Pontius Pilate did not want to crucify Christ had it not been for the jeering crowds who wanted Bar-Abbas to revolt against Rome. Even the false Messiah Bar-Kochba was doomed to destruction and today Masada bares the evidence.
Prophecy will not be as the Protestants interpret it but as scripture states it. It will be as God and history ordained it. And if you think you are immune from following Antichrist think of the Jews who followed Antiochus. Sooner or later your nationalism and your zeal from hating one over the other will overcome even the elect if the devil can convince where we failed to equip. The devil today convinced multitudes to believe that men can surgically amputate their private parts and the world thinks its normal. If he can convince the world of such depravity its not much to convince the world to deny that Christ can be in the Eucharist.
But God ordered John to only "measure the temple of God, and the altar and them that adore it".
How much do you adore the Eucharist and standing in worship while the priest faces the Altar?
Shall we be stopped by tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword or being slaughtered as sheep, death, life, angels, principalities, powers?
This is clear. Protestants do not adore the Altar but vehemently oppose it and therefore they are of "the court, which is without the temple, cast out, and measured not: because it is given unto the Gentiles [Antichrist], and the holy city they shall tread under foot two and forty months".
It is these who will carry out the spiritual and religious persecution against the Church.
This happens in the last 3.5 years, the same timeframe where John reveals when the seed of the woman is persecuted and is fed (the Eucharist) in the wilderness:
Then a great sign appeared in heaven: a woman clothed with the sun, and with the moon under her feet, and on her head was a crown of twelve stars … the woman were given two wings of a great eagle, that she might fly into the wilderness, into her place, where she is nourished for a time, and times, and half a time, from the face of the serpent … And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.” (Revelation 12:1, 14,17)
The moon (Islam) is after her seed (the children of Mary) and the nourishment in the wilderness is the Eucharist where Communion is practiced in secret and where all these view the Woman as their Ark-Mother.
Therefore, the Altar is not a stage with drums and disco tech lights. This by itself desecrates the Altar and the sacrifice, yet millions read the text not realizing they are prepped for Antichrist because they say that they love Jesus "Many will say to me in that day: Lord, Lord, have not we prophesied in thy name, and cast out devils in thy name, and done many miracles in thy name?"
These are charismatics, they claim to be prophets and exorcists, yet they have no authority in doing any of these missions because they were not sent. And then they say that they love Jesus, yet they slander Catholics day in and day out.
With the Jews, if government removes the Sabbath, you will end Judaism, while with the Catholic/Orthodox remove the Eucharist and its the catastrophe of catastrophes.
How can Protestants who removed 1 Maccabees 1 from their Bibles understand how prophecy regarding Antichrist is fulfilled:
Antiochus now issued a decree that all nations in his empire should abandon their own customs and become one people. All the Gentiles and even many of the Israelites submitted to this decree. They adopted the official pagan religion, offered sacrifices to idols, and no longer observed the Sabbath.
44 The king also sent messengers with a decree to Jerusalem and all the towns of Judea, ordering the people to follow customs that were foreign to the country.45 He ordered them not to offer burnt offerings, grain offerings, or wine offerings in the Temple, and commanded them to treat Sabbaths and festivals as ordinary work days. 46 They were even ordered to defile the Temple and the holy things in it.47 They were commanded to build pagan altars, temples, and shrines, and to sacrifice pigs and other unclean animals there. 48 They were forbidden to circumcise their sons and were required to make themselves ritually unclean in every way they could, 49 so that they would forget the Law which the Lord had given through Moses and would disobey all its commands. 50 The penalty for disobeying the king's decree was death.
51 The king not only issued the same decree throughout his whole empire, but he also appointed officials to supervise the people and commanded each town in Judea to offer pagan sacrifices. 52 Many of the Jews were ready to forsake the Law and to obey these officials. They defiled the land with their evil, 53 and their conduct forced all true Israelites to hide wherever they could.
54 On the fifteenth day of the month of Kislev in the year 145, King Antiochus set up
The Awful Horror on the altar of the Temple, and pagan altars were built in the towns throughout Judea. 55 Pagan sacrifices were offered in front of houses and in the streets. 56 Any books of the Law which were found were torn up and burned, 57 and anyone who was caught with a copy of the sacred books or who obeyed the Law was put to death by order of the king. 58 Month after month these wicked people used their power against the Israelites caught in the towns.59 On the twenty-fifth of the month, these same evil people offered sacrifices on the pagan altar erected on top of the altar in the Temple. 60 Mothers who had allowed their babies to be circumcised were put to death in accordance with the king's decree. 61 Their babies were hung around their necks, and their families and those who had circumcised them were put to death. 62 But many people in Israel firmly resisted the king's decree and refused to eat food that was ritually unclean.63 They preferred to die rather than break the holy covenant and eat unclean food—and many did die. 64 In his anger God made Israel suffer terribly.
So it is about consuming the unholy sacrifice of Cain; grape juice and unconsecrated bread, Muslim Ashura Communion or Halal instead of the Eucharist ...all this will suffice as an abomination of desolation of your temple.
SO WHAT ARE THE TRANSGRESSIONS?
Psalm 132 reveals a major clue: “Its priests [the Arks's priests] I will clothe with salvation, and its faithful will shout for joy,” (verse 16).
The God of the Ark of Bethlehem Ephratah will clothe its priests with salvation?
These are not Jewish Temple priests. Mary was no Ark Who sat in a literal temple.
To understand more we must look the priests with the Ark that the Jordan (symbolic of Christ) washed their feet causing the separation between what is dead (dead sea) and what is the water of life. Only the ones with the Ark are on the right side. Only the ones whose feet were washed can lead:
"as soon as the soles of the feet of the priests that bear the ark of the Lord, the Lord of all the earth, shall rest in the waters of Jordan, that the waters of Jordan shall be cut off from the waters that come down from above; and they shall stand upon an heap" (Joshua 3:13) "And as they that bare the ark were come unto Jordan, and the feet of the priests that bare the ark were dipped in the brim of the water, (for Jordan overfloweth all his banks all the time of harvest)" (Joshua 3:15).
Christ's harvest separates between who carries the Ark of the Covenant including who follows the Ark and who is without the Ark. Without the Ark, there is no covenant. Christ washes the feet of the disciples and only these can lead.
Even Judges 7 reveals another secret:
“Separate those who lap the water with their tongues as a dog laps from those who kneel down to drink.” Three hundred of them drank from cupped hands, lapping like dogs. All the rest got down on their knees to drink. The Lord said to Gideon, “With the three hundred men that lapped I will save you and give the Midianites into your hands."
The water is Christ. He is the Water of Life. To lap this water of life like dogs, pertains to gentiles taking the water of life by the tongue instead of the hand. These will be the ones whom God uses to combat Antichrist. Throughout Christian history, the Eucharist was consumed by the tongue. Today, before Antichrist comes to the stage, many are consuming it by the hand.
It is therefore, the ones who set their foundation of the apostolic succession which honors the Ark (Mary) and takes proper Communion and they stem from the twelve apostles. These will be saved:
"And Joshua set up twelve stones [twelve apostles] in the midst of Jordan [Christ], in the place where the feet of the priests which bare the ark of the covenant stood: and they are there unto this day." (Joshua 4:9)
The Ark is all over scripture. You know the scoffer for he will instantly ask 'where is Mary in the Bible as Catholics describe her?'
This is the most lame argument. If typology is used by the same scoffers to reveal Christ, we have similar typology that reveals the Ark. If one takes away the typology regarding Mary, then the typology regarding Christ would too be dismissed and the whole foundation is destroyed.
The scoffer is an instrument of Satan. He/she do not realize it and no matter how you try to help them drink, you can never succeed, until you notice their desire to dig wells. This is why Jacob dug wells. This is why Christ instructed to not throw your pearls to pigs.
So when we examine what is prefigured in the Old Testament regarding the Ark of the Covenant is fulfilled in the New testament in the Blessed Virgin. The Ark was gold inside and out while Mary had no stain of alloy, pure (Ex 25:11) (Lk 1:28). The Ark was set at the front of Israel's military maneuvers (Num 10:33, Josh 3:3). "Who is she that comes as terrible as an army" (Song of Songs 6:10). "The Word of God (written on tablets of stone) was placed in the Ark" (Ex 25:16) "Jesus is the Word of God. The Word made Flesh was placed in Mary's Womb." (John 1:1). The Holy Spirit 'overshadowed' the Ark in the Old Testament where God descended upon it (Lev 16:2; Num 9: 15-23; Ex 40: 34-38) just as in the New Testament, the Holy Spirit 'overshadowed' Mary (Luke 1:35). David has the Ark remain in the house of Obed Edom in the hill country of Judea for 3 months (2 Sam 6:11) is fulfilled when the blessed Virgin Mary visited her cousin Elizabeth in the hill country of Judea for 3 months (Luke 1:56).
But it was only the Levite priests who were permitted to handle the Ark, a lesson that both king David and Uzzah learned the hard way, not following protocol that God established through the Law got Uzzah killed regardless of his good intentions.
From the history of Israel, when God established the legal ordinances concerning the office and the priesthood till today, it is the priests who are expected to be perpetually ministering before the Lord, bringing before the Daily Sacrifice to be carried out within legal prescription which demanded nothing less than perfection from every offering.
God finally revealed the secret thoughts of the Hebrew priests and why He ended their sacrificial system which in itself prophetic of today:
A son honours his father, a servants their master. If then I am a father, where is the honour due to me? And if I am a master, where is the respect due to me? Says the LORD of hosts to you, O priests, who despise my name. You say, ‘How have we despised your name?’ By offering polluted food on my altar. And you say, ‘How have we polluted it?’ By thinking that the LORD’s table may be despised. When you offer blind animals in sacrifice, is that not wrong? Try presenting that to your governor; will he be pleased with you or show you favour? (Malachi 1:6-8).
While this prophecy was regarding Israel it is prophetic. Taking Communion unworthily or handling the Eucharist improperly or polluting the sacrifice of the Altar fulfills Malachi 1:6-8 on how Israel did the same. God simply demands the best. Whatever we build, whatever we provide, whatever we dress to His service must be the best.
By declaring that the animal sacrifices were being offered were “polluted”, God began the process to put an end to the system that has served the Jews for thousands of years, and announced a new sacrificial system was coming, one where Christ will forever cancel the animal sacrificial system. The perpetual sacrifice to be replaced, in fact, has been foreshadowed by God when He said, “For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering; for my name is great among the nations,” (Malachi 1:11).
From the very beginning of the inception of the Church, incense has been offered to the Name of the Lord. Among the only remaining two lampstands, Catholics and Orthodox, it is still the practice to this day to fill the Church with Holy Smoke, a smell that is “sweet smelling aroma to the Lord,” and the pure offering that is done daily is the Eucharist and is what is missing in the ones who abandoned the Covenant of Sacrifice.
These will end up collaborating with Antichrist. The Sacrament of the Eucharist was established by Christ Himself and could only be administered by the bishops, or by the priest as authorized by the bishops, as St. Ignatius noted:
Let no man do anything connected with the Church without the bishop. Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude [of the people] also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church,” (St. Ignatius, Epistle to the Smyrnaeans, Chapter VIII).
Mind you, St. Ignatius was writing this around 30 to 107 AD. He out of all people who came up way later would be familiar with the practice the apostles did themselves as they appointed elders to carry on such functions. And if there is any doubt to this, the Book of Acts should put an end to all doubt:
Now during those days, when the disciples were increasing in number, the Hellenists complained against the Hebrews because their widows were being neglected in the daily distribution of food. And the twelve called together the whole community of disciples and said, ‘It is not right that we should neglect the word of God in order to wait at tables. Therefore, friends, select from among yourselves seven men of good standing, full of the Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may appoint to this task, while we, for our part, will devote ourselves to prayer and to serving the word.’ What they said pleased the whole community, and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, together with Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolaus, a proselyte of Antioch. They had these men stand before the apostles, who prayed and laid their hands on them,” (Acts 6:1-6).
Such priests must be approved by the hierarchy at the time, the Apostles. Even when St. Paul became a convert to Christianity, he still had to be consecrated to serve God as an apostle:
While they were worshipping the Lord and fasting, the Holy Spirit said, ‘Set apart for me Barnabas and Saul for the work to which I have called them.’ Then after fasting and praying they laid their hands on them and sent them off. (Acts 13:2-3).
The practice of laying hands is ancient practice that can be found when Moses laid hands on Joshua, signifying the consecration of Joshua to lead Israel and to be empowered with the presence of the Holy Spirit. It also signify the high level of trust being placed into the priesthood as well as in the leader.
But the leaven enters by isolating scripture. The argument presented by Protestants as an excuse to promote self-appointed priests used scripture isolation. They claimed that since St. Paul argued about Jesus being the eternal High Priest that the priesthood is over based on the Book of Hebrews.
But Christ ordained the first priests:
“Then Jesus called the twelve together and gave them power and authority over all demons and to cure diseases, and he sent them out to proclaim the kingdom of God and to heal,” (Luke 9:1).
This remains in effect:
‘All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age’ (Matthew 28:19-20).
Notice how the authority functions. Christ has all the authority and therefore He ordained the disciples to carry out His mission. And if such authority ceased with the disciples how then did Christ remain with only these twelve disciples "to the end of the age"? Therefore, Christ remains with the priesthood till the end of the age commissioning only them to do baptism.
It is why, the only two lampstands, Catholic and Orthodox, have long contended the value of the apostolic-succession because in the laying of hands, they are empowering their bishops, who then empower the priests to be able to hear confession of sins, as Christ has explicitly ordained:
“Receive the Holy Spirit. If you forgive the sins of any, [only then] they are forgiven them; if you retain the sins of any, they are retained,” (John 20:23).
No matter how one tries to massage this verse, Jesus made it clear, the disciples had the same authority as Christ Himself had in forgiving sins or to even retain sins. Some will yell, “This is blasphemy! God alone forgive sins,” to which I will ask, “Why do you sound like the Pharisees?”
It was in fact the scribes and the Pharisees who began to question:
‘Who is this who is speaking blasphemies? Who can forgive sins but God alone?’ When Jesus perceived their questionings, he answered them, ‘Why do you raise such questions in your hearts? Which is easier, to say, “Your sins are forgiven you”, or to say, “Stand up and walk?” But so that you may know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins’...” (Luke 5:21-24).
Christ clearly gave all authority to Peter, and by extension to the disciples:
“I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven,” (Matthew 16:19).
And this included the forgiveness of sins as clearly stated in John 20:23.
Priests are not there to sit in the seat of judgement to condemn you. They would very much rather to help save your souls because you are that valuable to them. Even confessing your sins, no matter how it makes one extremely shameful, it is actually healing and it takes a great deal of courage.
And as to tradition, St. Paul in closing out on the abuse of the Eucharist, he dropped this line, “About the other things I will give instructions when I come” (1 Corinthians 11:34b).
But we have no written record of what those instructions were in relation with the Eucharist. Did God forget to jot them down? Hardly. Scripture hints and tells us that what the Church practiced from its inception will be given to the church.
Rejecting the Eucharist the Real Presence of Christ in the Sacrament is what puts these on the side of the Antichrist. Even the prophet Joel spoke of the Eucharist:
“The grain offering and the drink offering. Have been cut off from the house of the Lord; The priests mourn, who minister to the Lord … Alas for the day! For the day of the Lord is at hand; It shall come as destruction from the Almighty.” (Joel 1:9, 15)
Yet even now, says the LORD, return to me with all your heart, with fasting, with weeping, and with mourning; rend your hearts and not your clothing. Return to the LORD, your God, for he is gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love, and relents from punishing. Who knows whether he will not turn and relent, and leave a blessing behind him, a grain-offering and a drink-offering for the LORD, your God? (Joel 2:12-14)
If such verses are for the Old Testament temple, how is it in the context of "the day of the Lord"? Even better yet, why is it that banning this "grain offering" sparks the day of the Lord? He even left us a "grain offering" practiced until the Day of the Lord. This discounts any other interpretation. This "grain offering" destroys centuries of worthless commentaries.
St. Paul even instructed, “For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death until he comes” (1 Corinthians 11:26).
It is easy to give examples how Protestants can switch on a dime and unite with Islam. Decades ago Protestants considered Mormons as heretics until two men with suits showed up, Mitt Romney and Glenn Beck and they then instantly, including even Franklin Graham appeased Mormonism.
Throughout the history of the reformation Protestants removed the Eucharist in every place they controlled. Bishops who were made to convert and abandon the Covenant would coerce his entire diocese to Protestantism. Jesus warned of the little leaven which is a starter that kicks in and begins to take away elements of the true faith little by little until there is nothing left. It truly is what the locusts have eaten.
But the Protestant will always counter with a quick comment that sounds right "all I need is Jesus and Him crucified".
But imagine if Moses saw the burning bush and God spoke through it these words: "For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that so whoever believes in Him shall not parish but have eternal life". And then Moses asks "Who are you Lord" and the Lord answered him and said "for their is only one mediator between man and Me and that man is Jesus Christ".
And then the Lord left and never contacted Moses who etched these two verses on two separate tablets which were passed down to our day and we all wrote these two verses in a booklet and printed them on In-n-Out burger wrappers and under french fries paper trays.
And if anyone tells us anything about God we would reject it and only apply these two verses.
Would that be considered love? How would the world even know Who is this Jesus and how does He mediate?
If that was all what God sent us, we are in major trouble. These two verses would not be love at all despite that they are true.
Yet this seems to be the main two verses many use today when confronted with any verse that does not suit their fancy.
Scripture can validate that for God also so loved the world that He also had the faithful make an Ark a symbol of Mary. But then the Holy Spirit hovered over a human Ark in a mysterious way and she bore a Son and named Him Jesus Who is all in all.
This ark, as it turns out, is all over scripture. It did not symbolize Jesus, yet what was in it did. And Who rested on it was the Holy Spirit Who hovered over Mary as He hovered over the waters in Genesis to begin creation.
When I shared Psalm 132 in my previous Sunday Special and asked anyone to refute, I did not get a single refutation. I had asked: how is it that the Ark is assumed to heaven with God, together:
Go up Lord, to the place of your rest [heaven], you and the ark of your might!". (Psalm 132:8)
And I still ask, how is it that this Ark is exclusively Jesus?
So next time you run into someone who claims to know scripture and prophecy, tell them to discuss with you the nine lethal words and win them to the one true church or else silence them with the truth.
(Special thanks to brother Trevor for contributing in the last section)
Post a Comment