Refuting Gene Kim on Slow Apostasy and Perhaps More

Refuting Gene Kim on Slow Apostasy and Perhaps More · What About Bad Popes? · McCullough on France · Three Secret Societies and Catholicism their Enemy Misrepresented

The Church Is NOT In the Final Tribulation (Rev. 2:8-9a) | Dr. Gene Kim
BBC International | 17.IX.2019
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXpcnLvBPoI

I

"stray away and apostasise" ... a thing the Church cannot do, see Matthew 28:18-20.

Specifically the part where it says "all days" (sometimes mistranslated as "always", probably after Protestant French models, since "toujours" used to mean "all days" and now means "always").

2:28 "a thousand years, fullblown apostasy"

Oh, so after one thousand years, the promise of "every day" ceases to apply?

4:27 Oh, so you are better than ante-Nicene fathers at studying Bible truth?

Nah, don't think so.

Modern times are busy times. Even if you are not technically a slave, you are often a slave of a timetable.

Contrast ancient Roman times. St. Joseph could absent in Egypt from his carpenter's shop, leaving it to older sons from a previous marriage, and just resume it when he got back with Our Lady and Child Jesus.

Dan Barker thought, when St. Paul mentioned 500, most of whom are still alive, nobody could check, St. Paul could have afforded the bluff, no problem. Well, he's presuming St. Paul was speaking to 20th C. Proletarians. No, he was speaking to Roman Empire not just resident slaves, but also citizens. Free citizens. Some of whom could absent for the year or so it would take to get to Holy Land on foot and back again after checking. Or even many of whom could do so.

Same with studying Bible : even persecuted Roman Christians enjoyed more leasure than you do, simply because they were not living in the 20th C.

And obviously the Church would set apart time for its bishops, priests, deacons to actually do the study very well.

You have a greater choice of tools and texts, than they had? True, but your choice involves some more morbid items, like the idea Apostolic Fathers were heading towards apostasy. So, you are making a poorer use of the choice you have than they were making.

"you got time"

Old Romans were so much more pressed by the clock ... not.

They used sun dials, where you could know if you were in "first hour" (6 - 7am), "second hour" (7 - 8am), and if you had shown them a watch showing exact minutes (6:35 am) they would have marvelled more about apparent uselessness of your trinket than about its ingenuity.

THEY got time. YOU are the one pressed by the clock. You are turning historic truth upside down. Just so you can pretend you are wiser about the Bible than the Apostolic Fathers and Ante-Nicene Fathers and obviously also Post-Nicene Fathers.

II

4:58 "everyone had manuscripts all scattering around see"

It's presumed Christians if not invented at least very early took on codex form. Manuscript or print doesn't matter all that much, manuscript is a bit like large print. But codex vs scroll does matter.

Meaning, yes, there were early on codices of complete Bible.

Did all have them, they were expensive? No, hence the idea "each Christian needs to have a Bible" is wrong.

But did the Fathers have them? Think. Each of them was a prominent figure in his Church, more likely than simple lay members to get martyred, up to 313 (except in Ethiopia and Armenia and Edessa, outside Roman Empire). Would they being devout enough to take that kind of post not want a Bible? And would they not be sufficiently supported by their Church to have one? Sure. Case closed.

ANY Christian even teenager in 3:rd C. having a Bible? Baloney.

Any Church Father in 3:rd C. NOT having a Bible? Equally BS.

And, for next time, learn the difference between "manuscript vs print" and "scroll vs codex".

So they very much did have at least as good an opportunity as you to know the truth.

III

5:15 Apostasising more and more and more till it contributes to the Catholic Church later on?

Baloney. Apostasy is not that gradual.

I'll show you an example of Apostasy from the Catholic world.

1947 someone in Paris is asking Papal Biblical Commission in Rome "pretty please, can we say Adam developed from previous humans" or sth like that. They got too much of a yes, in 1950 Pope Pius XII changed this to a half and half no in Humani Generis. Fast forward to present decade. TOFspot blogger claims to have shown a model in which Adam is ancestor of all men but not sole ancestor in his generation. His friend Mark Shea is calling Creationists "liars for Jesus" and pointing to them as examples of what happens when you don't obey all that comes from "Pope Francis"

1947 - 2019 = 72 years. That's how fast apostasy happens, there are perhaps fewer real Catholics than new "Catholics."

IV

5:20 "Dark Ages, full blown Apostasy"

First phrase, "Dark Ages" - full blown mythology.
Second phrase "full blown Apostasy" - again full blown mythology.

Probably not half as historic as Greek mythology about War of Troy.

V

5:37 "their focus was to break from the Catholic Church system"

And therefore completely right in doctrine was not required of them ... read Matthew 28:18-20 once again, you just made Our Lord Jesus Christ a liar with those words.

VI

5:55 During that time the focus was to resist persecution etc.

Fine. And next generation of those was even on your own admission, Roman Catholics or Catholic Church System.

6:14 And you missed out on "angel of the Church" meaning its bishop ....

VII

7:05 And your refutation of JW was very probably used by St. Athanasius at Nicaea too.

When the Catholic Church was refuting Arians, while Novatians seemed to no longer exist and Donatists only locally around Carthage.

And if anyone was apostasising, it was Donatists, when they became robber "anarchists" known as Circumcellions.

VIII

9:07 Catholicism is (mainly at least) post-Tribulation, for rapture of those surviving to second coming and resurrection of those who had died before that, at the same time.

9:22 We also think the Church will fail and be socially and militarily more and more conqured by Antichrist, till Jesus comes down.

A bit like US Cavalry saving the last three waggonloads going West from a massacre by someone like Geronimo.

IX

10:30 "The Church will be raptured before the tribulation"

Where does that leave "all days" in Matthew 28:18-20?

Plus, the camp of the saints means the Church.

10:51 "The Church can't bring the kingdom"

What if the Church is the kingdom?

"Christ has to bring in the kingdom"

What if He did so by founding the Church?

X

13:47 The ten days part is about individual prison.

Ten days to martyrdom or freedom.

The 1260 days are overall a bit longer.

On Who's Holding Back

The Antichrist Didn't Reveal His Identity...BUT HE'S HERE! | Dr. Gene Kim
BBC International | 27.VIII.2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WeztOsTICzo

I

13:57 Did you say "and his tabernacle"?

"And he opened his mouth unto blasphemies against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven."
[Apocalypse (Revelation) 13:6]

Some blaspheme the Holy Trinity, the name under which we know God since Christ's speech in Matthew 28.

Some blaspheme the Tabernacle of the Sacrament.

Some blaspheme the honour given to saints - who are ... in Heaven, right?

So, it seems Apoc. 13:6 attributes to THE Antichrist some JW/Muslim and some Protestant tenets.

II

15:21 Why would Israel have been holding Antichrist back in 50's AD, when true Israelites were persecuted Christians, and when other Israelites were submissive to Rome and for that matter clearly anti-Christian, clearly persecuting Christians, to the point where Christians had enough of being identified with them and quit calling themselves Jews, in the time of St John who in his last work, the Gospel (unless Epistles are even more recent) uses "Jews" like Synoptics use "Pharisees" or "Scribes" or "Sadducees"... why?

And how could Israel hold him back in AD 70?

You are the first time I heard any give "Israel" as solution to who's holding back (one RC solution is Imperial Dignity in Rome or Roman Empire ... mystery of inquity could be a Babylonian or Egyptian infiltration of it, which was after Actium still at bay). I have heard Protestants say both "Church" and "Holy Spirit" but not yet Israel.

It has to be something with a presence both back then and up to end times.

And Roman Empire ceased in World War I, with the fall of Russian Czars in Revolution and the exile of Charles I (Charles the Last) from Vienna. Just then in comes Communism ... with so many evils. Guess why Roman Empire is still an option? Because everyone does not agree with Gibbon on when Roman Empire ended.

III

15:57 Someone unduly occupying a major Catholic Church will in fact do, since each Catholic Church is a temple of God, and its tabernacle usually contains the Temple which tore itself down and build itself up in three days - the Body of Our Lord.

18:29 And in fact, the Catholic Church has sacrifices, so, getting them to cease 3 and a half years at Tribulation's second half of week, that is one point more in common between Antichrist and Protestant Reformations.

IV

As you brought up Jews, I'm myself as "Jewish as Torquemada" if you get my drift (or, ok, somewhat more goy blood perhaps than he, who cares), so - Romans 11 means every Jew who is not a Catholic is a cut off branch, but every Jew has a place in the Catholic Church. God can make each grafted back whenever he choses.

This does not mean Catholicism should "rejudaise", that supposes it was in some important and bad sense dejudaised.

It was dejudaised as to halakha, as Christ's new covenant replaced the Old Temple. Never as to haggada, never as to what it believes. And there are still Catholics who are ethnically the same as those Jews in Jerusalem AD 33 on Pentecost day. They are called Palestinians.

V

It seems there were only two things you noticed about Rome - it's connection to Roman Catholicism (while missing there was a Church in Rome St. Paul called saints, or more precisely, "called to be saints"), and its empire.

You have not considered its Republic.

Modern ideologies start with a Liberalism which harkens back to the Roman Republic (very pronouncedly so in the days of American and French Revolutions), and Protestantism harkens back to Luther being a disciple of Erasmus who was a nostalgic of the Republican Cicero.

Aix was made part of Republic's Empire under one Calvinus. Sextus Calvinus, hence Aquae Sextiae.

Reminds of another Calvin ... and I don't mean Calvin and Hobbes. And, while Antiochus Epiphanes was a Seleucid, heir of the leopard power, he was also a vassal of the Roman Senate.

So, I agree fourth beast is probably Rome. But in a Republican, anti-monarchic and anti-Catholic sense.

Responding to Gene Kim on Antichrist

He is wrong about the Catholic Church. He could still be right we just don't know yet.

Who are the Six Antichrists?
BBC International, 17 June 2017
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjS8liUjLJ8

I

I think a falling away happened to Catholicism, socially, over c. 40 years from 1943 to 1994.

Whether Pius XII was a true Pope or an imposter by heresy previous to election, he very carefully opened a door with Divino Afflante Spiritu in 1943.

What does it say? Nothing directly anti-Biblical. It just says, Biblical writers, Bible-Book writers, we call them hagiographers, have personal characteristics which we can study through the texts. [Own example : The woman who has paid so many doctors without finding a cure comes in Mark, not Luke - perhaps because Luke is a doctor.] There is nothing wrong in such study.

Well, the thing is, a bad type of angle already existed in Biblical scholarship, like Markan priority and a few more. Pius XII's encyclical, whether he foresaw it or not, whether he intended it or not, opened the door to this bad apostatic scholarship already existing among Protestants.

1994 Antipope "John Paul II" allows "Cardinal" Ratzinger to condemn Fundamentalist Bible reading. The Christmas liturgy is also changed.

Old Liturgy still has, even New Liturgy up to then had, in Latin rite, Our Lord born 5199 after Creation, 2957 after Flood (LXX based).

New text from 1994 on replaces "5199" with "unknown ages" and "2597" with "several thousand years". See what is happening?

Now, the Temple of God is arguably the Catholic Church and the Man of Sin could very well be an Antipope. Like ... Bergoglio.

But, the rapture you think of is arguably not happening until AFTER the tribulation, second coming, doomsday, perhaps an hour before Armageddon battle.

Actually, 9:50, some thing Bergoglio has already fulfilled Apocalypse 17 by that light show with so many animals projected on the white walls of the Vatican buildings.

The Catholic Church, however, he does not represent, since he is not Catholic.

10:24 Your Church history is faulty.

With Catholic Church not being a follow up to "Church that is in Rome" or (one of the epistles of St Peter) "Church that is in Babylon", but to Nero, where did the Church of Christ go?

For the Church persecuted by Pagan Emperors we keep records. Roman Martyrology two days ago was Pope St Evaristus, whom Emperor Hadrian's administration killed. Same with every Pope up to St Sylvester, the man who baptised Constantine or received him as Catechumen.

Now, suppose St Sylvester was a fraud or a weak pastor, the pagans were let in too easy, the Church was taken over, where did the real Church go? Where are your records, century by century, of who the real saints were, if the Catholic Church was not? You don't have any such records, because you don't have any body with realistic claims of reaching back to Apostles in unbroken succession. You have Baptists who say the Apostles were Baptists (denied validity of infant baptism, required full immersion, three times, not just a little water), well, you don't have direct back up in the Bible for that claim. What is more important, you have gaps of centuries in your Church history. If not in theory, at least in how it is recorded.

10:41 You may brag about your spiritual stature as much as you like, but you don't really have an intellectual one. You claim Constantine founded the Catholic Church.

First, it is a lie.

Second, you don't do much arguing to back up that lie, you just keep repeating it (as far as I have seen up to now, if you have resources on this, do link).

Third, it is a lie which plays into the hands of the deniers of Christian truth. If the main historically known provider of Bibles was messed up, what is to stop the Bible from being so?

Adding Charlemagne to the list is also not helping the credibility of Christianity.

Even more Bibles messed up because provider is suspect.

While Napoleon was temporarily a kind of Antichrist by attacking the Catholic Church, you are wrong on who kept Jesuits going after a weak Pope had disbanded them, namely it was Frederick II of Prussia and Catherine II of Russia, with successors.

As to Jesuits being formed again, that was Pope Pius VII, after Napoleon had already been exiled to Elba.

The Allied Powers having declared that Emperor Napoleon was the sole obstacle to the restoration of peace in Europe, Emperor Napoleon, faithful to his oath, declares that he renounces, for himself and his heirs, the thrones of France and Italy, and that there is no personal sacrifice, even that of his life, which he is not ready to do in the interests of France.
Done in the palace of Fontainebleau, 11 April 1814

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napoleon#Exile_to_Elba

The suppression was carried out in all countries except Prussia and Russia, where Catherine the Great had forbidden its promulgation. Because millions of Catholics (including many Jesuits) lived in the Polish provinces recently annexed by the Kingdom of Prussia, the society was able to maintain its existence and carry on its work all through the period of suppression. Subsequently, Pope Pius VI would grant formal permission for the continuation of the society in Russia and Poland, with Stanislaus Czerniewicz elected superior of the society in 1782. Pope Pius VII had resolved during his captivity in France to restore the Jesuits universally, and after his return to Rome he did so with little delay. On 7 August 1814, by the bull Sollicitudo omnium ecclesiarum, he reversed the suppression of the society, and therewith another Polish Jesuit, Thaddeus Brzozowski, who had been elected in Superior in Russia in 1805, acquired universal jurisdiction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Society_of_Jesus#Suppression_and_restoration

12:40 Your historical documentation on Adolph Hitler's Catholicism is faulty.

Before the takeover in 1933, German Catholic bishops - who supported Brüning, not Hitler - had excommunicated all members of the NSDAP. After this takeover, the excommunication was restricted to high ranking members - Hitler arguably was one.

If Hitler wanted to assist Holy Mass, he could not do so with a normal priest obedient to the Vatican, but there were "brown priests" (brown as in SA uniform = pro-NSDAP) who sometimes allowed him to assist Holy Mass. One of them died in 1937, it was a very old abbot who did not see him at his worst, which came after that year, and who blamed already existing moral problems of NSDAP on the Protestants in it. Like the eugenics part.

Let's see if you repeat more errors on Hitler and Catholicism ... meanwhile, Pius XII left Rome and had all Churches in Rome locked up when Hitler visited Mussolini in Rome.

The 555 connection is interesting.

I have seen another interpretation of it.

Olivet discourse is - if you will consult William Tapley - divided into three sections.

4 verses about the King of the South (444)
6 verses about THE Antichrist (666)
5 verses about what or who defeats him (555, logically : like the 5+5+5 of the Blessed Virgin's Rosary)

If Hitler was 555, perhaps some prayed the Rosary for him and he was saved (some saying he survived the Bunker).

[Note : Gene Kim said Hitler became a "Nazi" in Austria, before he went to Munich. Not true, scanned photos of Hitler's membership card certainly do mark n. 555, as Gene Kim said, but also that it is "Ortsgruppe München" of Deutsche Arbeiter-Partei. In other words, he was already in Munich, had already left Austria.]

II

KINGJAMES is nine letters.

You know that 666 is divisible by nine? It is 9*74.

I think ASCII is important to get the right numerology, and one interesting thing, in block letters, it is 8 or 9 letters (very barely 10) which will add up to 666.

KINGJAMES=665.
He was also King James I (of England - of Scotland he was James VI).

There is one language in which reverent synonyms of Bible will add up to 666.

HOLYBIBLE
SCRIPTURE

Check it out. Guess why?

My hunch is, KJV is cursed.

Less inaccurate than certain modern versions which leave out verses, but cursed as seducer of Protestants.

The Catholic Bible in English is Douay Rheims - originally translated and printed in France, because England persecuted Catholics.

1611 is a year which should make Baptists concerned about King James. The persecution of Lollards was in England not conducted on Papal lines, but an English parliament law from 1401, De heretico comburendo.

Well, it was obeyed again, against Anglicans, by Mary Tudor.

The last English monarch who applied it was however the "Anglican Pope" James I. Against whom? Catholics? No, they were considered traitors, not heretics. Guess again, it is closer to you ...

"April 11 – Edward Wightman, a radical Anabaptist, is the last person to be executed for heresy in England, by burning at the stake in Lichfield."

That is the year after 1611, it is 1612:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1612

It is still KINGJAMES.

[Note, on looking, it seems Wightman would arguably have deserved burning more than any Baptist who just apostasised into false views on Sacraments : he was perhaps as vicious as Giordano Bruno, if the charges I read are right.]

Like KINGJAMES, also VLADIMIRA adds up to 665. It can be read as genitive or accusative of VLADIMIR, like WLADIMIRA adding up to 666. It can also be read as Vladimir A = Vladimir I. Vladimir B, Vladimir II, if written VLADIMIRB, adds up to 666.

In Russia, there are fairly clear candidates for Vladimir A and B ...

The first of them made a Revolution about one hundred years ago. There is Catholic prophecy saying Satan was given a century. Look who started it in Russia.

17:59 What happened after KINGJAMES published his HOLYBIBLE or his SCRIPTURE?

Lichfield!

18:12 What you say about England is not really totally just bright.

Recall how you felt about world conquerors like Napoleon and Hitler a few minutes ago?

I love England. I love US. But I don't love what these states have been doing certain things during the centuries.

Btw, so far all my numerological matches, even exact ones, could, theoretically, just be good prospects.

I think BERGOGLIO is clinched, but I don't know it. He could still have time to repent, abdicate his false papacy, become a real Catholic. There are more than just he and Putin even on ASCII, and there is still Greek and Hebrew gematria too (Ratzinger's "papal" name, in Greek, "King Hari" in Hebrew, should Prince William's younger brother become king - God preserve him!).