You should be able to find the Revelation's 20 sermon on the website. We just went through it recently.
If anyone desire enter life, I would listen (obey) Word of Yahweh, and Messiah rather than church and even Paul's writing(peter said Paul's writing is hard to understand and people mess up and easy misunderstand) , chruch often making mistake, error, even teaching a lie they do not know it. Look up His Word, rather than listen speaking from men in church as they are not to be trusted easy.
I think it's more importian that Obey and doing His Desire in old and new together by His Word (it's not mose's law, it's not jew's law,its His word) rather than know a sign when it's happan, nothing new under old sun, right now, USA is very bad shape and most of them don't see it or people dont' want hear a bad new what happan in goverment, believeing a lie told by goverment.
(Hint: best listen and obey Word of Yahweh, and Word of Messiah, not Paul writing, I am not saying Paul is false, but it's just hard to understand and often enemies of Yahweh use paul's writing just not to obey His Torah, but I believe Paul don't mean that, and most he was talked about "law of sin" not His Word or Law of righteous)
Hi Jythier,
So, then it should be easy for you to summarize how your pastor explains Revelation 20:4-6 (referred to in point 11 : "What We Believe" ? @ Pine Ridge) Obviously, you'll need to ask him about 1 Corinthians 15:20-23 unless he's preached a sermon about that too, in which case you'd be able to present a summary of that too.
While you're busy with that, I think you might want to add to that point 6, which is right on the subject and states:
'6. We believe in the personal, pre-millenial, imminent return of our Lord Jesus Christ. (1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:9, Revelation 19-20:6)' ( "What We Believe" @ Pine Ridge )
Here's a pastor's explanation of a section 1 Corinthians 15:20-23, followed by the same of a section of 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:9:
1 Corinthians 15:20-23 The Message (MSG) 21-28There is a nice symmetry in this: Death initially came by a man, and resurrection from death came by a man. Everybody dies in Adam; everybody comes alive in Christ. But we have to wait our turn: Christ is first, then those with him at his Coming, the grand consummation when, after crushing the opposition, he hands over his kingdom to God the Father. He won't let up until the last enemy is down—and the very last enemy is death! As the psalmist said, "He laid them low, one and all; he walked all over them." When Scripture says that "he walked all over them," it's obvious that he couldn't at the same time be walked on. When everything and everyone is finally under God's rule, the Son will step down, taking his place with everyone else, showing that God's rule is absolutely comprehensive—a perfect ending! 1 Thessalonians 4:13-5:9 The Message (MSG) 15-18And then this: We can tell you with complete confidence—we have the Master's word on it—that when the Master comes again to get us, those of us who are still alive will not get a jump on the dead and leave them behind. In actual fact, they'll be ahead of us. The Master himself will give the command. Archangel thunder! God's trumpet blast! He'll come down from heaven and the dead in Christ will rise—they'll go first. Then the rest of us who are still alive at the time will be caught up with them into the clouds to meet the Master. Oh, we'll be walking on air! And then there will be one huge family reunion with the Master. So reassure one another with these words.
The Message (MSG)
21-28There is a nice symmetry in this: Death initially came by a man, and resurrection from death came by a man. Everybody dies in Adam; everybody comes alive in Christ. But we have to wait our turn: Christ is first, then those with him at his Coming, the grand consummation when, after crushing the opposition, he hands over his kingdom to God the Father. He won't let up until the last enemy is down—and the very last enemy is death! As the psalmist said, "He laid them low, one and all; he walked all over them." When Scripture says that "he walked all over them," it's obvious that he couldn't at the same time be walked on. When everything and everyone is finally under God's rule, the Son will step down, taking his place with everyone else, showing that God's rule is absolutely comprehensive—a perfect ending!
15-18And then this: We can tell you with complete confidence—we have the Master's word on it—that when the Master comes again to get us, those of us who are still alive will not get a jump on the dead and leave them behind. In actual fact, they'll be ahead of us. The Master himself will give the command. Archangel thunder! God's trumpet blast! He'll come down from heaven and the dead in Christ will rise—they'll go first. Then the rest of us who are still alive at the time will be caught up with them into the clouds to meet the Master. Oh, we'll be walking on air! And then there will be one huge family reunion with the Master. So reassure one another with these words.
Now refer back to my earlier post where I linked to and explanation of 1 Corinthians 15:52 and let's look at a pastor's explanation:
1 Corinthians 15:51-52 The Message (MSG)
51-57But let me tell you something wonderful, a mystery I'll probably never fully understand. We're not all going to die—but we are all going to be changed. You hear a blast to end all blasts from a trumpet, and in the time that you look up and blink your eyes—it's over. On signal from that trumpet from heaven, the dead will be up and out of their graves, beyond the reach of death, never to die again. At the same moment and in the same way, we'll all be changed. In the resurrection scheme of things, this has to happen: everything perishable taken off the shelves and replaced by the imperishable, this mortal replaced by the immortal. Then the saying will come true: Death swallowed by triumphant Life! Who got the last word, oh, Death? Oh, Death, who's afraid of you now?It was sin that made death so frightening and law-code guilt that gave sin its leverage, its destructive power. But now in a single victorious stroke of Life, all three—sin, guilt, death—are gone, the gift of our Master, Jesus Christ. Thank God!
Here's the link again, should you decide to give it a read: click here
I also blogged another discussion I had with an ex-pastor now an Agnostic: When is Jesus Coming Back? Are You Ready?
The question: (by Christopher31)‘Yeah, that’s been chanted and believed for the past 2000 years. Still hasn’t happened. Just how soon is soon, by your estimation?’ My answer: (by headheart)‘I cannot speak for the Jedi knight in this regard (I’m sure he’s going to give you a good answer) but it’s been my conclusion that it’s probably going to happen at what is referred to as the resurrection (ref. 1 Corinthians 15:52 – the last trumpet) and the references to this happening “soon” were more along the lines of so many texts which act as a wake up call/warning rather than a specific indicator as to a time, so that we’re always ready.’
The question: (by Christopher31)‘Yeah, that’s been chanted and believed for the past 2000 years. Still hasn’t happened. Just how soon is soon, by your estimation?’
My answer: (by headheart)‘I cannot speak for the Jedi knight in this regard (I’m sure he’s going to give you a good answer) but it’s been my conclusion that it’s probably going to happen at what is referred to as the resurrection (ref. 1 Corinthians 15:52 – the last trumpet) and the references to this happening “soon” were more along the lines of so many texts which act as a wake up call/warning rather than a specific indicator as to a time, so that we’re always ready.’
Peace,
Aeryck
You have to be joking!
ps. Would that include you too?
oh, but Protestants do have a lot of extraBiblical stuff....that would be the Protestant doctrines of Sola Scriptura, (the sole rule of faith is the Bible alone), Sola Fides, (justification by Faith Alone), "Once Saved, Always Saved", Rapturism, Dispensationalism, Christian Zionism and 2 Covenants existing side by side. Each of these doctrines exist becasue someone read the Bible, decided for themselves what it means and arrogated for themselves the right to coin new doctrines. That's why there are so many different Protestant churches with different doctrines.
The scandal of the religious system of Protestantism is there is no "unity of the Spirit" ..."one body", "one faith", "one Baptism" of Ephesians 4:3-6.
Actually, those all come from the Bible. The letter God wrote. Remember God? Can you see him past the Pope's hat?
God gave a mediator and the Catholics decided human priests would be a better fit. That praying to the mother of Jesus was something they should do. That God didn't quite get it all down and needed to be able to still speak outside of the Biblical record.
I believe Catholicism jumped the shark and protestants got it back on track. I mean, they were persecuted for even having Bibles at some points in history by the Catholic church - obviously they knew that their doctrines didn't make sense, and wouldn't stand against the Word of God. Because the Catholic church became evil for a period. The birds of the air nested in its branches until it was so full of them that they couldn't keep evil out of power, and so evil was spread from the church. Even in your world where Catholicism makes sense, you have to admit that Protestants were a major wake-up call for the Catholics that they needed to get there faith back in line with God.
Aeryck,
I hope you don't mind I've taken the liberty to change the passages of 1Thess.4 to the Douay Rheims version.
A little more from: The Rapture by Aristobolus (Roger) Allan:"To be sure, there will be a catching away of the saints on earth but this happens at the last trumpet sound (Revelation 11:15). Writing to the Christians in Thessalonica, St. Paul tells us what the 2nd coming (Greek- parousia) is like. 15 "For the Lord Himself shall come down from heaven with a commandment, and with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God: and the dead who are in Christ, shall rise first. 16 Then we who are alive, who are left,shall be taken up together with them in the clouds to meet Christ, into the air, and so shall we be always with the Lord.17 Wherefore, comfort ye one another with these words. (1 Thessalonians 4:15-17)".
The same words are used here to describe the catching up of Christians as is used to describe the 2nd coming of the Lord. Both occur in the clouds, in the air, and everyone on earth sees it happen. In other words, the so-called Rapture and the 2nd coming of Christ will happen at the same time." ( read more)Peace,AeryckAdd to that another passage from Paul's letters too: 1 Corinthians 15:52 What is this 'last trumpet' that Paul is talking about?
Jythier posts:
Of course it doesn't sound like Christ coming and wouldn't make sense if one is steeped in the Rapture doctrine and Dispensationalism.
We know the proponents claim these rest on Scripture. The truth is it was the creation of John Darby around 1830. He traveled to Scotland to meet with Margaret McDonald, a woman who had a "vision" that Christ would come in two stages. Prior to that, no theologian or denomination had ever suggested a "two stage" coming of Christ; not Martin Luther, not Calvin, not Wycliff. Neither the Apostles nor the Early Church Fathers ever suggested Christ would come again in two stages. They never expounded any such teachings. Yet, according to its supporters the Rapture and Dispensationalism are extremely important parts of the Christian message. Yet it was unknown before 1830 and perpetuated in America beginning in 1909 by Cyrus I. Scofield. C'mon? This alone should make one skeptical.
Note: The history of Darby's meeting with Margaret McDonald is documented in the book "The Unbelievable Pre-Trib Origin" by Dave MacPherson.
The Rapture doctrine and Dispensationalism are bogus. The former is a complete misrepresentation of Scripture; the latter is a distortion of some visionary turned into a schema of endtime events.
15 "For the Lord Himself shall come down from heaven with a commandment, and with the voice of an archangel, and with the trumpet of God: and the dead who are in Christ, shall rise first. 16 Then we who are alive, who are left,shall be taken up together with them in the clouds to meet Christ, into the air, and so shall we be always with the Lord.17 Wherefore, comfort ye one another with these words." 1 Thessalonians 4:15-17 DRV.
So what is St.Paul teaching the Thessalonians and by them, us?
For context, we first go to the preceding verses where St. Paul has spoken of the necessity for holiness of life and for brotherly love among Christians (4:1-12). With verse 13, he turns to the fate of Christians after death. Misunderstandings on this issue had caused distress and apprehension in the Thessalonian Church. Some believed that Christians who died before Christ’s return would somehow miss out on that glorious event. St. Paul calmed their fears by telling them that just as Christ returned from the dead at His Resurrection, so also, at the end of time, His faithful followers who have died in the interim will be restored through resurrection v. 14. Verse 15 St.Paul describes the glorious Second Coming of Christ down from Heaven as globally broadcasted by God's command, by an archangel's shouting voice and the sound of trumpets. It's enough to wake the dead and that's exactly what St.Paul says will happen. He distinguishes two groups as regards the situation people find themselves in at Our Lord's Second Coming. One..those faithful in Christ who are alive, who are left; and two...those who have already died, these will rise again.
At Our Lord's Second Coming, the dead in Christ will rise first. They, along with the faithful in Christ who are alive, who are left: these will be "taken up" that is, changed 1Cor. 15:51; 2Cor. 5:2-4 by the power of God and will change from being corruptible and mortal to being incorruptible and immortal. They will be taken together in the clouds to meet Christ as He comes down from Heaven, as the Apostle's Creed teaches, to judge the living and the dead.
When we look at all this in context, it's easy to see that it does not really support the Rapture doctrine. Verse 16 refers to something that will happen as part of Our Lord's Second Coming. The course of events St. Paul presents is straight-forward. At the time of the Second Coming, first the dead in Christ will be raised, and then all the faithful in Christ — the dead now restored and those still alive now transfigured — will ascend in the clouds, in the air to be with Christ as He comes down to earth to judge the living and the dead. This is the universal interpretation of the Fathers.
Why does St. Paul speak of an ascension of the righteous? The Fathers suggest at least three answers to this question. St. Gregory of Nyssa says that the ascension is a natural consequence of the purity of the transfigured resurrection body: "...this change which takes place...when the resurrection trumpet sounds which awakens the dead in an instant transforms those who are left alive to incorruptibility according to the likeness of those who have undergone the resurrection change, so that the bulk of the flesh is no longer heavy nor does its weight hold them down to earth, but they rise up through the air..." ("On the Making of Man" 22,6).
St. John Chrysostom and others say that it is to provide Christ with a proper escort for His appearance on earth and to demonstrate His favor toward the faithful. "If He is about to descend, why shall we be taken up? For the sake of honor. When a king enters a city, those who are in his favor go out to meet him, but the condemned await their judge inside. Or, when a loving father comes, his children, and also those worthy of being his children, are taken out in a chariot to see and kiss him, but the servants who have offended him remain indoors. So we are carried out upon a chariot to our Father...See how great our honor is? As He descends we go out to meet Him, and what is more blessed, we shall be with Him always" (Homily 8 on Thessalonians).
We agree, St. Paul does speak of a "rapture". But St. Paul and the Fathers see this as an event which accompanies Christ’s glorious Second Coming and immediately precedes the Final or General Judgment on the Last Day.
The raising of the dead is very significant because it gives a time-clue as to when the 'rapture" occurs for the verse clearly states that the "rapture" immediately follows the resurrection of the dead.
So when does the resurrection occur in order to know the timing of the "rapture" of 1Thess.4?
Scripture is clear that the dead will rise at one time and one time only and that is on "the Last Day" of this world's existence. There are 6 eschatological references to the Last Day ..St.John 6:39; 40, 44, 54; 11:24; 12:48.
Furthermore Scripture is clear that the resurrection of those Christian faithful in Christ and non-Christians will occur at the same time. St.John 5:28-29. When we combine the facts concerning the resurrection of St.John's Gospel with the "rapture" in 1Thess. 4,it's quite evident that the "rapture" cannot occur prior to the Last Day of this world's existence. So, therefore any eschatological scheme taht seeks to posit a "rapture" prior to the end of the world is automatically false.
The Rapture doctrine which Darby and Scofield taught and which Lindsey, Walvoord, and others still teach, is different from that. They talk about it as a separate happening, part of a decades long program of events leading up to Christ’s Coming. The Dispensationalists see the Rapture as the disappearance of the faithful from the earth before the Great Tribulation and many years before the Final Judgment. This is totally foreign to the Apostles, to the Church Fathers, and frankly, to Scripture.
What I mean by "the Church".....
"The Church" of the New Testament means something very definite and it's not a building or buildings. St.Paul speaks of "the Church" 17 times. St.Luke, 8 times, and St.Peter and St.John once each. "The Church of God" appears 11 times, "in the Church", 12 times, "of the Church", 18 times, and "to the Church", 5 times. All in all, the NT writers point to this visible body, The Church, in 110 references.
It could not possibly have been any of the thousands of churches, with or without steeples, which came into existence 1500 years later at the Luther instigated protest and rebellion against the CC.
The Book of Acts 2 tells the thrilling beginning of Christ's Church on the first Pentecost Day over 21 centuries ago. Verses 37-42 gives the account of the events and verse 41 tells of the baptisms, that "about three thousand souls" became Christians and "were added" as a result of St.Peter's teaching and preaching. There are other passages in which St.Luke makes reference to the numerical growth of the Church as a result of the effectiveness of the Gospel message boldly proclaimed by the Apostles, the foundation of the Church. 2:47, 4:4; 5:14; 6:1, 7; 9:31; 11:21,24;16:5.
That Church sent out on Pentecost Day 33AD was the early fledgling Catholic Church. In order to understand this, one must read St.Matt. 16: 18-19 when Christ said to SimonPeter, "Thou art Peter, and upon this rock, I will build My Church and the powers of Hell will not prevail against it. On that occasion, Peter was given Christ's "keys" which signified supreme Christ-delegated authority to "bind and loose". Again, the Lord gave the keys of the kingdom to Peter, and by Peter to the Church.
Just before Our Lord Jesus Christ, King of kings ascended into Heaven where He rules over Earth, He gave His mission to His Church and sent them out as the Father had sent Him....."Going therefore, teach ye all nations; baptizing them in the name of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Teaching them to observe all things I have commanded you, and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world." Douay Rheims version.
If Christ established a Church in which He was to abide "All days even to the consummation of the world", and He did, then that Church must be unified doctrinally, organizationally, and worshipfully, as Christ was to abide therein and the Holy Spirit was to safeguard it from error in matters of faith and morals; hence, the gates of Hell would never succeed in prevailing against it.
Christ's Church was to be a single, universal, visible society of validly baptized faithful, united together in "one organic body" by the profession of "one faith" with Christ as its Eternal Priest and Head, and worship by the participation of the same sacrifice, (Take ye and eat..This is My Body...This is My Blood...do this in memory of Me).
In short: The Church is the "one body" of Christ, Who is the Eternal Head which continues and completes Christ's mission. Col. 1:24.
During the very time her bishops were committing to paper the writing we call the NT, as confirmed by Church Fathers, the historians of the Apostolic age, the Church was a functioning organism with one set of unchanging doctrines, identical to those which have continued up to our time in the CC, despite the fact that the truth is constantly under attack.
Again, Christ established a Church, not churches. He called His Church, "a kingdom" St.Matt. 4:13. It was to be a "house of God", 1Tim.2, not houses of God.
Protestantism inflicted the world with its abstract declaration that....the church is all believers in every church. The only thing they have in common is profession of belief in Christ (but not all believe in the Holy Trinity), minus unity as to "teaching them to observe all things Christ commanded". All of these hundreds of diverse Protestant churches, individually or collectively, cannot be the Church that came into existence of the first Pentecost Day.
Christians are called to do as Christ did while here on earth, preach the gospel to the ends of the earth and 'do even greater things than these (performed miracles)' and I personally do not worry about when the rapture may take place, which is entirely up to God. Why be concerned with the headlines of the day to look for clues? Why think that the mark of the beast is a chip -check Exodus where the word of God was bound to the hand and forehead. The mark is returning to physical and spiritual slavery.
Christ established the "Church", which is all who believe, profess faith and baptised in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The bible teaches the Trinitarian nature of God -Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Read http://www.ccel.org/creeds/athanasian.creed.html for definition. Bible also teaches Hypostatic Union of Christ being fully God and fully man in perfect unity. Any believe about the nature of God and Jesus Christ differing from the Trinitarian and Hypostatic are not Christian. Many, Islam, Mormonism, Jehovah's Witnesses, Creflo Dollar types, Unitarians and others deny both and are cut off from the body of believers who are in Christ -which is what THE CHURCH is, not the Lutheran, RCC, Eastern Orthodox, Ethiopian Orthodox, Anglican, or any other denomination.
RCC told me I was baptized as a non-denominational and it didn't count; others said the same thing. My mother, a confirmed/baptized RC, was told by some protestant denominations that hers didn't count. Still others said it didn't matter where we were baptized, we weren't baptized by them so we weren't in the eyes of God. How's that for the unified "body of Christ"? Thankfully, many churches recognize that one baptized in a Trinitarian church is valid and not ripping the body of Christ apart at the seams.
We are either all baptized and adopted in the kingdom of God or not. If you are a Christian and happen to love worshiping according to the traditions of the RCC, Baptist, Lutheran, Anglican, Methodist, etc... church and it's doctrines founded on scripture -enjoy. If your church strays from the word of God, better run.
What are those several points?
What things? Please don't give the sensationalist speculation.
The Book of the Apocalypse contains 22 chapters. David B. Currie whom I've already mentioned makes an excellent case that the first 19 chapters relate the details of the two children of God, the Old versus the New. Galatians and Hebrews are foundational to this. From this we understand what Jesus had predicted in the Olivet discourse of St.Matt. 24.
Much of The Apocalypse doesn't predict the future but rather tells of the past...that these past events may be a foretaste of the future, just as Sarah and Hagar were a foretaste of the events surrounding August 10, 70 AD.
The messages in the Apocalypse aren't unique to it, the theme runs throughout the Bible.
........................
I disagree.
Remember the OT prophecies were all about Christ in one way or another and with Christ, they have been fulfilled.
This includes Daniel's last week which was fulfilled in 70AD.
Those steeped in the Rapture doctrine are still waiting for Daniel's 70th week when in fact it encompassed the seven decades of convenantal transition during the first century. The Apocalypse is a series of visions describing the Old to the New transition, including the Great Tribulation of the Olivet discourse, and the casting out of Hagar explained by St.Paul in Galations.
Once the descriptions of all these events are linked together as a whole story, then it's plain to see the bulk of the St. John's visions are not primarily about our future although some of them foreshadow the future eschaton.
At the same time that is not to say that the events of the Apocalypse don't apply to our daily lives, for they do. The evil in our world tells us we must keeps these lessons before us.
..................................................................................
This has absolutely nothing to do with modern Israel.
Almighty God has already dealt with Israel. You need to study Galatians and Hebrews and how those relate to The Apocalypse as far as the two covenants are concerned. From those we understand that Abraham cast out Hagar which prefigured that God would cast out the Old Covenant Mosaic Law....The Old Covenant is finished ....of its end, the first signal came in 33AD when Christ died on the Cross the Temple Veil was rent and once and for all in 70AD.
Like the two sons of Abraham existed together for some time, and one was "cast out", so too the OLd and New Covenants. The co-existed for some time, about 40 years if you do the math between 33 AD and 70AD. But the co-existence could not go on forever becasue there was too much confusion and conflict as St.Paul explained to the Galatians and Hebrews.
The only solution was to "cast out" the son of bondage, the Old Covenant system and that's precisely what Jesus had predicted in the Olivet Discourse. He warned the Jewish leaders that their rejection of the Truth would be the cause of their destruction. He also implied that the two children of God, the Old and the New Covenant would co-exist for some time, "a generation" St.Matt. 24:34. Before the end of that generation, about 40 years, Jerusalem would be destroyed, the Temple and its altar destroyed followed by the ending of the priestly tribe of Levi with its family of Aaron and the ending of the existence of the tribe of Judah with its family of David, in which the Messias was foretold to be born, evidences the indisputable historic fact that the Judaism of the Old Covenent ceased to exist.
The ending of OT Judaism was providential. It had fulfilled its glorious mission. That mission ended with the coming of the predicted Messias, in the Person of Jesus; who at the Last Supper instituted a new priesthood, and the New Sacrifice predicted by Malachais 1.
The only God-instututed means of atonement for sin would come by Our Lord Jesus Christ and His New Covenant religion from here on until the consummation of the world.
The Apocalypse is primarily a prophecy that describes the process of casting out the Old Covenant system. Because it illustrates how God keeps His promise to His children, we can trust its promise of Christ's Second Event.
Care to explain where/how Scripture shows a general concept of a rapture/rescue?
Where is there any Biblical evidence as to why Christians should be rescued from tribulation?
As I see it, all Biblical evidence points to the contrary, that faithful followers of Christ have already undergone and will continue to undergo great persecutions and tribulations until the end of the world. Furthermore, Catholics believe that history bears witness that the Church thrives under persecution.
We should bear in mind that tribulation has a physical dimension (earthquakes, wars) and a spiritual one (false prophets, heresies, etc. ).
In St.Matt 24, Jesus pointed out the buildings of the Temple and said not a stone would be left standing. Which brought questions from His disciples about the Last Things (Endtimes). They asked when it will happen and what are the signs for they saw the end of the Temple and the end of the world as coinciding. Our Lord prophecied 3 events that seem to be interwoven.
Verses 4-14, Our Lord says that between then, 33AD, and the end of the world, the Gospel will be preached to every one. In the intervening period, the Church will experience all kinds of tribulations. They aren't signs of the end of the world, they are simple the normal context in which Christian preaching and teaching takes place.
Verses 15-22 tells of the signs of the destruction of Jerusalem in 70AD. Flavious Josephus, a contemporary Jewish historian, writes in The Jewish War, that 1,100,000 people died during the seige of Jerusalem which gives some ideal of the scale of those events. To be sure for the physical safety of those Christians if Almighty God in His mercy had not come to the rescue by telling them the signs to look for and get out, they too would have died.
Verses 23-31, Interwoven with the prophecy of the destruction of Jerusalem comes Jesus' announcement of the signs of His Second Coming.
The main thing we must take from all this is that we should grow in trust of Jesus and His teachings and persevere in the faith until the end. Verse 25, "Lo, I have told you beforehand.." the same pattern as in verses 4-13, meaning between the fall of Jerusalem 70AD and the end of the world, Christians will experience tribulation, that is, suffering time and time again, persucution, false prophets, false messiahs who will lead others to perdition.
St.Matt. 24:11, 23-26 reference to false prophets has a continual application throughout time, but especially near the end of time 2Col 11:13-15; 1Tim4:1; 2St.Peter2:1; 1St.John4:1; Apoc 16:13; 19:20; 20:7-8.
St.Matt. 24:21 description of future "great tribulation" as the most dreadful time in history is fulfilled since the apostasy among those within the Church is unprecedented due to the arrival of the "man of sin", a man who will deceive people with signs and wonders as never before. 2Th 2:3-9; Apoc 18:21.
My point is Christians are not going to be "raptured.rescued" from tribulation, or the great tribulation.
What does this mean?
St.Matthew 24:29's language of the darkening of the heavenly bodies has multiple applications. Many of the references of the darkening are used as figures of judgment upon ancient Israel. Is. 5:30; 24:23; 34:4, (which is quoted here) and Joel 2:10; 3:15.
St. Matt. 24:29's language concerning the darkening and obliteration of the heavenly bodies also coincides with 2St.Peter 3:10-13 and Apoc. 21:1-5 cataclysmic end to the present world. They can each be understood as literally fulfilled at the end of time when the universe will be destroyed. The complete destruction is denoted by the specific inclusion of the stars being obliterated Is. 13:10; Joel 2:10;3:15; St.Luke 21:25; Ac 27:20 and Apoc. 6:13.
Regarding the chart you provided in #22, and specifically #4, this obliteration of the heavenly bodies means the end of the world would come immediately before the Second Second Coming for the Final Judgment.
Btw, Thank you for providing the chart.
I'm in the #4 green AMILLENIALISM camp becasue St.Augustine, leading the way of the Church Fathers interpreted Scripture as teaching that the millennium of Apoc 20:1-6, began with the first coming of Christ and will end with His Second coming and tansition into eternity. I have found in years of study that this view fits the preponderance of biblical passages better than any other.
Moreover, the Church Fathers rejected the idea of a future 1,000 year earthly millenium as did the Council of Ephesus in 431 and alot of it had to do with the binding of Satan as St.Augustine specified in his writings.
The CCC reiterates these same truths and accepts the amillenial eschatology as the teaching of the Church.
I could never accept Premillinnial eschatology because it was rejected by Pope Pius XII in hs statement against "chiliasm".
"In recent times on several occasions this Supreme Sacred Congregation of the Holy Office has been asked what must be thought of the system of mitigated Millenarianism, which teaches, for example, that Christ the Lord before the final judgment, whether or not preceded by the resurrection of the many just, will come visibly to rule over this world. The anwser is: The system of mitigated Millenarianism cannot be taught safely." Denzinger, Henry, Sources of Catholic Dogma.
The CC's rejection of Premillennialism is also noted by theologian, Ludwig Ott. Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma.
Jythier
Lula posts:
The "stuff" you're learning comes from Protestant oral tradition, an unBiblical body of teaching that is passed down.
Aeryck posts:
lula posts:
I know you truly believe that but in truth, none of them come from the Holy Bible.
Take Sola Scriptura---the central Protestant tenet that the Bible alone is the sole rule of Christian Faith. WHERE IN THE BIBLE DOES IT SAY THAT?
The notion of the Bible being the sole rule of faith is nowhere found in the Bible either implicitly or explicitly. This is the fatal flaw for in order for the idea of Scripture being the sole rule of faith it must itself be expressed in Scripture or it is a self refuting proposition.
But guess what is in the Bible? The Apostolic teaching that we are to embrace oral Tradition, those unwritten truths that come from God Himself to the Apostles handed down to their successors through the Church. Furthermore the Bible specifically prohibits us from going by the Bible alone in an attempt to ignore those Traditions that came down to us by the Apostles word or mouth or letter. 2Thess.2:15. St.Luke makes it clear that the teachings of Christ and the Apostles were transmitted to later generations through both the written Word as well as the unwritten or oral teachings, called Tradition. St.Luke 1:1-4.
And as far as sacred Tradition, don't cite St.Matt. 15. For Our Lord was not condemning Tradition that St.Paul was instructing us to stand fast and hold in 2Thess. 2:14, but only the corrupt traditions of the Pharisees.
Secondly, the Bible alone as the sole rule of Christian Faith has no basis in the history of Christianity. How did Our Lord tell the Apostles to communicate the Faith, the truths which must be believed for salvation? He commanded them, "go forth and teach all nations, baptizing them..." He said to SimonPeter, "Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build My church." And St. Paul taught clearly that the "house of God, which is the Church of God, the pillar and ground of truth."
Our Lord gave St.Peter authority, and He commissioned the Apostles to preach in His name. As the Father has sent Me, I also send you."
Our Lord wrote no books and He didn't tell His Apostles and disciples to write Bibles and let every man read and judge for himself which is the essence of Protestantism--as you have said yourself...each individual reads the Bible and decides for himself what it means! No!
Our Lord established a Church to teach in His name. "He that heareth you, heareth Me. He that despiseth you, despiseth Me."
"And if he will not hear the Church, let he be to thee as the heathen and the publican."
The Church and the Faith existed before the New Testament. The Church was administering the Sacraments, the Apostles were forgiving sins, the Church was spread throughout the entire Roman Empire making martyrs before one word of the NT was written.
The last book, The Apocalypse, was written a good 65 years after the Ascension of Our Lord. And then for over 300 years the Chruch didn't have all the Sacred Books compiled into the one Book.
And this brings us to the question of Authority.
You give someone a book called "The Bible" and tell them everything in it is the infallible word of God and the first thing they ask, is "Who says so?"
Books don't write themselves....and books by multiple writers don't just compile themselves into one big book and then claim to be infallible word of God.
It was the Catholic Church at the Council of Carthage in 397 through the guidance of the Holy Spirit that settled once and for all what was the official canon of the New Testament ..that decided which books were divinely inspired and which were not. At the time there were a good bit of other "gospels" and "Epistles" circulating; some written by good men and others plain fabrications such as the so-called Gospel of Pilate or the Gospel of Nicodemus. It was the CC Tradition that produced the Bible and not the Bible that produced the Church.
This clearly shows the "Bible alone" has no basis in history. The Protestant religion can't answer the question, "Who says the Bible is the infallible written word of God?" Only the Catholic religion can.
Besides that, if, as you say, the Bible is the sole rule of Christian Faith, if faith cometh only by reading the Bible, then what of the souls who lived 1500 years before the printing press was invented? How were the nations made familiar with Christ and converted to Christianity without the Bible for 15 centuries? Doesn't the Protestant notion of Sola Scriptura which stakes a man's salvation upon reading the Holy BIble impute to Almighty God a total indifference to the salvation of countless millions of souls who lived prior to the invention of the printing press? Doesn't the Bible alone as the sole rule of Christian Faith end logically in the blasphemous conclusion that Our Blessed Lord failed to provide an adequate means of conveying to every age the knowledge of His truth?
As it happened it was through the teaching and preaching of the Church that these countless souls in all countries and in all ages come to the knowledge of truth that they might be saved without either the written or printed Bible, both before and after its production.
And finally, the doctrine of the "Bible Alone" is contrary to reason. Because if you give a person a Bible and tell him he must read it and decide the meaning. The Lutheran congregation buys into Luther's private interpretation....the Methodists buy into John Wesley's interpretation, and so forth and so on.
And there are other self-styled Protestants who read the Bible and decide for themselves the meaning and if he is zealous and determined enough, he can start his own church. This is essentially the Protestant system. There is no Church for them established by Christ to teach infallibly in His name. There is no authority established by God to tell me that I might have made a mistake. This is how we know with certainty that the Bible Alone is not only nowhere found in Scripture but is contrary to Scripture for it ends up in thousands of erroneous and conflicting Scriptural interpretations and is contrary to what Our Lord established His Church to be.
I have read that the Protestant Rapture teaching is that Jesus is coming back, not once more, but twice. One of the times, which could be any day, any moment, He will come secretly to snatch away true believers from their troubles on earth. This event has been called the "secret rapture".
Where/how am I misinformed about the 'secret' part?
Who told you this lie? When Luther established the Protestant religion, he threw out the 7 sacraments, Confession being one. So, you got it from Luther handed down over the generations through Protestant oral tradition.
Christ instituted the 7 Sacraments as a means of giving us His grace. The early Christians received them from the Apostles who received them from Christ. Confession is called the Sacrament of Penance by which those who fall into sin after Baptism may be restored to God's grace.
Yes, Our Lord DOES care. Yes, Our Lord is our Eternal Priest.
And Yes, Yes, Yes, Our Lord cares greatly about confessing our sins to a lawfully ordained priest...that's why He endowed His priests with power to forgive sins in His name.
And if you're shaking your head and disagreeing, here's the explanation.
Now Christ paid the price for our sins and He surely has the right to say how forgiveness shall be applied. We can't deny the right of Christ to administer forgiveness through agents of His own choosing, nor can we insist that He must forgive us on our conditions, while we ignore His conditions (as Luther did and Protestants do).
Catholics believe that God alone can forgive sins...and the way that God has chosen to administer that forgiveness is through His Priests.
I prove that God delegated that power to His ministerial priesthood of the New Covenant by first citing St. Matt. 16:18-19, "And I tell you you are Peter, and on this rock I will build My Church, and the powers of Hell shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys to the kingdom of Heaven and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound also in Heaven; and whater you loose on earth, shall also be loosed in Heaven."
Christ later made the same promise to the other Apostles, saying, "Amen, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth...." St.Matt. 18:18.
And next, St.John 20:21-23, "As the Father has sent Me, I also send you." When He said this He breathed on them and He said to them, "Receive ye the Holy Spirit. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain; they are retained."
Now, Christ's mission was to destroy sin and He gave the same mission to His Apostles and He gave them the power of the Holy Spirit for this special work. To say that Christ did not confer this power is to gut the words of Christ of any true meaning.
St.Paul certainly exercised the power of binding and loosing from sin and the effects of sin in the case of the incestuous Corinthian. In 1Cor.5:3, we find him saying, "I have already judged him that hath done so" and in 2 Cor. 2:10, he justifies his forgiveness of the repentant man by saying, "If I have pardoned anything, I have done it in the person of Christ."
Christ commissioned His Church to teach all nations until the end of the world. The Apostles had to hand on all essential powers given to them by Christ to their successors. In Acts, we see this happened and other bishops and later, deacons were ordained.
If those subject to the Apostles had to obtain forgiveness, there is no reason why we should be exempt. We share the same Sacraments as the very first Christians and must have the same obligations. Till the Protestant Reformation (really Rebellion) all Christians went to Confession. We certainly have the writings of the Church Fathers to support this truth. That lawfully ordained Catholic priests have this power was Christian doctrine in the first century and it is the very same Christian doctrine today in the Catholic Church.
Confession is part of having Faith in Christ and believing all that He commanded.
"Receive ye the Holy Spirit. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them; and whose sins you shall retain; they are retained."
So you don't believe that you have the Holy Spirit?
Why had the Father sent Jesus? To save sinners by pardoning their sins.
This verse is the moment that Our Lord conferred authority to forgive sins, this pardoning power through the institution of Penance was not a personal gift to the Apostles, but a permanent institution to last as long as there are sinners in the world. Confession is for reconciling the faithful who have fallen into sin back to God.
The penitent acknowledges his sin(s), has sorrow in his heart for the sin(s)he committed, confesses them with the resolve to sin no more, and while the penitent says an Act of Contrition, the priest forgives sins with the words, "I absolve thee from thy sins in the name of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen. This is called the Absolution.
At that moment his sins are forgiven he receives the Holy Spirit which produces sanctifying (divine) grace in his soul.
It's through the sacraments that we obtain God's sanctifying grace. They are channels through the Holy Spirit grace enters our soul.
The Sacrament of Confession is the means Our Lord established for Christians to wash their robes in the "blood of the lamb". Apoc. 7:14. Since all of us fall through sin, Christ's loving and wise sacraments of Penance is ther to help restore us to grace and heal the wounds we bring upon ourselves through sin.
So how long does he have the Holy Spirit after confession?
By virtue of their ordination, Priests always have the power to forgive sins. Our Lord said to them, "Receive ye the Holy Spirit." Whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven; and whose sins you retain, they are retained." The action and words indicate an actual communication of the Holy Spirit to them, by whose power they would be able to effect what He told them to do. The Greek word used for "forgive" is in the active sense.
Again, As Christ conferred this power upon the Apostles, they conferred it in turn upon those whom they ordained and consecrated as priests. These in turn ordained others and by an uninterrupted succession of lawfully ordained bishops, the power has been retained and transmitted in the Churcch. And the Church exercises her absolving powers through priests. That's why St.Paul wrote to Titus, "For this cause I left thee in Crete that thou should set in order the things that are wanting and should ordain priests in every city, as I also have appointed thee." 1:5. Douay Rheims Version.
Our Lord instituted the sacrament of Penance for the necessities of men, and He certainly did it in a way in which it could be applied to them in their necessities.
Since the rise of Protestantism, the name "Christian" has been used in so many different senses as to have almost become meaningless. No quabbles with your definition as to who is a Christian...e.g. a person who is properly Baptised, believes in the Holy Trinity and the Divinity of Christ and I would add who practices the religion of Christ.
I know in popular usage today Christianity is used in reference to all those forms of religion who profess belief in Christ. In reality, Christianity rightly signifies only the religion of Christ correctly and completely presented. Christianity cannot therefore signify a multitude of sects (what is now commonly called denominations), blending isolated truths of the CHristian religion with various errors which form the basis of division amongst themselves.
But your definition of "the Church" Christ established....
Scripture teaches that Christ established a Church, a specific Church and based upon Scripture, and particularly St.Matt. 16:18-19 your definition the Church is all who believe, profess faith and are baptized can not be correct.
Christ did not confer His own power of binding and loosing or the authority to teach the truth in His name to all nations until the end of the world to the Lutherans, the Eastern or Ethiopian Orthodox, the Anglicans, and for that matter, not to any of the other sects which all came into existence well after 33AD when Christ's Church was built on St.Peter.
I'm thinking of St.Paul's exhortation to unity to the Ephesians 4:2-6, "Careful to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. One body and one Spirit, ...one hope, ....One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, One God and Father of all,.."
All who profess to be Christians, of course, ought to be united in Christ's one Church, one body, one faith, one baptism, but they are not.
Remember that Our Lord said, "I am the Truth". Truth excludes error. Jesus founded His Church and said, "And if he will not hear them, tell the Church. And if a man will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican." St.Matt. 18:17. Or ST. Paul, "Obey your prelates, and be subject to them." Hebrews 13:17. Or St.Paul calling the Church "the pillar and ground of truth."
One can easily see that your definition of the "Church" is a real problem with these passages. It just doesn't make sense because the Church, whose human authorities spoke for her had Christ's authority, and they instruct and direct the faithful.
In short, what I'm saying is no Church founded by a man or woman can possibly can possibly be equal to the one Church founded by the Son of God.
If one believes in Christ they must consider as necessary what Christ believed necessary. Scripture teaches He certainly thought the Church He established was necessary. For centuries, Christians have said, not only I believe in Jesus Christ, Our Lord....but also I believe in the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. They made an act of faith in both Christ and in His Church.
If you no longer believe in Christ's Church, then something has gone wrong somewhere.
But history documents when and by whom that something gone wrong somewhere....
Luther taught Protestants "Sola Fides" to believe they become members of Christ by their individual faith alone. He rebelled against the Church, rejected her authority, doctrines, the Sacraments and so they do too. Protestants have become congenital individualists and unwilling in religion to recognize our dependence upon others in the doctrine of the Church, but rather insist on dictating their own terms and definitions.
What I'm saying here is not to impugn in any way Protestant's sincerely held belief in Our Lord Jesus Christ. No, not at all. Love and believe in Christ by all means.
The Church has the whole truth along with everything we need for our salvation, and those outside her do not. Do not let your belief in Christ serve you as an excuse to repudiate His Church and to assert that it is of no importance whatever to find that one true Church He thought fit to establish.
As I see it, the only reason why the CC told you your Baptism may not be valid is because it wasn't done properly.
The Catholic Church covers her teaching on Baptism in the Catechism of the CC # 1213 through 1284.
Because Almighty God has bound salvation to Baptism, He kept it easy.
While ordinarily the Bishop, priest or deacon would baptize, in the case of necessity, anyone, even a non-baptized person, with the required intention, can baptize using the Trinitarian formula which consists in immersing the person to be baptized in water, or pouring on his head, while pronouncing the invocation of the Most Holy Trinity: saying I baptize you in the name of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.
In Baptism, our souls are washed from Original Sin and Actual sin, in the case of an adult. This is affected by sanctifying grace poured into the soul through the invocation of the Holy Trinity.
They were treading water about 50 yds. offshore when Al Kogler cried out. "I turned around," Shirley said later, "and saw this big grey thing flap up into the air. I don't know if it was a fin or a tail. I knew it was some kind of fish. There was thrashing in the water. He screamed again. He said, 'It's a shark! Get out of here!'"
Looking down on the ocean from the Presidio, San Francisco's history-encrusted Army post, Master Sergeant Leo P. Day saw what happened next. "I could see the boy in the foaming red water, shouting and signaling someone to 'go back, go back.' Then I saw the girl, swimming toward him, completely ignoring his warning. It was the greatest exhibition of courage I have ever seen."
Shirley reached Albert and seized his hand, "but when I pulled, I could see that his arm was just hanging by a thread." She slipped her arm around him and began to swim for the beach. When she was near enough, a fisherman threw her a line. After they were on the sand, Shirley, a Roman Catholic, scooped up some sea water and let it run over the head of her friend (who had never been baptized and belonged to no specific faith). "I baptize thee in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost,"* said Shirley, making the sign of the Cross, and whispered to Albert, "Is that all right?"
"O.K.," he gasped.
She told him to repeat after her the act of contrition: "0 my God, I am heartily sorry for having offended thee. I detest all my sins because I dread the loss of Heaven and the pains of Hell, but most of all because they offend thee, my God, who art all good and deserving of all my love."
Just before Albert Kogler lapsed into unconsciousness, he whispered: "I love God, and I love my mother and I love my father. Oh God, help me." Two hours later, in the Presidio's Letterman General Hospital, he died.
*A valid baptism in case of necessity, recognized by the Roman Catholic Church even if performed by a nonbeliever, provided that the one baptizing really "intends to perform what the church performs."
There once was a thief hanging on a cross next to Jesus. And the thief asked Jesus to remember him... and Jesus said, "But you're not baptized... too bad..."
So, in the end, your theology is directly contradicted by the Bible. That doesn't matter though, because a fallible human has said that what Jesus said was some sort of special exception and that salvation is through baptism and other religious rituals, which, if that were true, the Jews would have not been so yelled at by Jesus, would they? Basically, what happened in the church is that it decided that it wasn't a heart problem - it was a ritual problem. The Jews were doing the wrong rituals! So they created their own rituals by which to be saved. Anybody looking at a Bible, though, would have been able to figure out that these rituals were not necessary for salvation, though... and that half of the things taught from the pulpit had nothing to do with the scriptures or what Jesus said, and in fact, contradicted them.
So they hid the Bible from the populace, many believing that only a priest could interpret it properly, but the real problem being that anyone could figure out the truth from it and then would realize the church was turning into a power and money-hungry organization, where you could pay for your sins to be forgiven... The people in positions of power had gotten there not from being spiritual, but from being diplomatic and political, and were likely atheists.
So Martin Luther stood up and said that we needed to take our faith back from those who had stolen it, and split from what had become a political organization and created a church again. One that followed the words of Jesus and the words of the apostles, which, if you hadn't noticed, they wrote down in letters which became the Bible. The Catholic church leaders had sold themselves, and the only way for God to save the church was to not have it be tied to the political organization the Roman Catholic church had become. The church, as you see it, is a name, the RCC, and that could never fall because the Bible says it will never fall... but I highly doubt that God cares that you call it the RCC. The Church is the body of believers and always has been. The RCC is an organization of the body of believers, at it's best, and just an organization at it's worst. It's refusal to remember who Jesus really was and what he spoke against while clinging to those very things makes it a 'religion' in it's worst form - made up of many rituals, but no heart.
Quoting Jythier, reply 74There once was a thief hanging on a cross next to Jesus. And the thief asked Jesus to remember him... and Jesus said, "But you're not baptized... too bad..."So, in the end, your theology is directly contradicted by the Bible.
Jythier, Jythier, Jythier,
First, the necessity of Baptism for salvation is not my theology. It is Christ's teaching....thoroughly Biblical Catholic Church teaching as per St.John 3:5; St.Mark 16:16; St.Matt.28:19; Gal. 3:27 to name some.
Quoting Jythier, reply 74Basically, what happened in the church is that it decided that it wasn't a heart problem - it was a ritual problem. The Jews were doing the wrong rituals! So they created their own rituals by which to be saved. Anybody looking at a Bible, though, would have been able to figure out that these rituals were not necessary for salvation, though... and that half of the things taught from the pulpit had nothing to do with the scriptures or what Jesus said, and in fact, contradicted them.
Baptism is necessary for salvation of all men because Christ said, "Unless a man be born again of water and spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God." From the time of Christ this has been the unequivical teaching of the Church. The reason lies in the fact that only Baptism can remit Original Sin; no one with any taint can enter Heaven.
Secondly, we know that Baptism achieves its effects through the power of Christ's Passion. But Christ knows that for some, it's impossible to receive the sacrament. Those who through no fault of their own have not received Baptism through water, can be saved through what is called Baptism of Blood or Desire. An unbaptized person receives Baptism of BLood when he lays down his life for Christ or some Christian virtue. OUr Lord promised, "He who loses his life for My sake will find it." St.Matt. 10:39.
Quoting Jythier, reply 74So, in the end, your theology is directly contradicted by the Bible. That doesn't matter though, because a fallible human has said that what Jesus said was some sort of special exception and that salvation is through baptism and other religious rituals,
Jythier, "there was once a thief hanging on a cross next to Jesus named Dismas, now commonly known as the "Pentitent Thief" or the "Good Thief", and this is how all of the elements were there for him to receive Baptism of Desire.
Here's the Scriptural passage and comments following; you all can be the judge.
St.Luke 23:39-43, “And one of the thieves who was crucified, blasphemed Him, saying, “If thou be Christ, save Thyself and us.” 40 But the other rebuked him, saying: “Neither dost thou fear God, seeing thou art under the same condemnation? 41 We, indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man hath done no evil.” 42 Then he said to Jesus, “Lord, remember me when Thou shalt come into Thy kingdom!” 43 And Jesus said to him: “Amen, I say to thee, this day thou shalt be with Me in paradise.”
St.Ambrose wrote the episode of the 2 thieves invites us to admire the designs of Divine Providence. Both thieves are in the same position--in the presence of the Eternal High Priest as He offers Himself in sacrifice for them and all mankind. One of them hardens his heart, despairs and blasphemes while the other thief, repents, corresponds with grace and was thereby saved. He left the cross for Paradise. Here, St.Ambrose comments, “The Lord always grants more than one asks: the thief only asked Him to remember him, but the Lord says to him, “Amen, I say to thee, this day, thou shalt be with Me in paradise.”
The conversion of the penitent thief was a miracle of grace won by the merits of Christ. When the thief saw the patience and gentleness in which Jesus suffered and how He repaid injuries with love, and when he heard Him address God as His Father, he opened his heart to grace and believed that Jesus was the Messias and the Son of God. With this “faith” there was awakened in hope and confidence in the power of the Redeemer to pardon him.He had committed great crimes and now, at the point of dying, he hoped to receive pardon. Love for Jesus also entered his heart and impelled him to do what he could to protect Him from the insults of the other thief whom he upbraided for his blasphemies. Verse 41, From his love of Jesus proceeded a deep contrition which he made known by a sincere confession of his great guilt, whereby he had deserved the punishment of death. He accepted his punishment and suffered willingly in satisfaction of his sins. He didn’t ask to be delivered from temporal punishment, but acknowledged that his sufferings were no more than his due. His conversion therefore was very real and perfect, and Our Lord remitted all his sins and promised him possession of Paradise.
.................................................
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:
Sign in or Create Account
