The Orthodox Church in America

           a Puppet of Russia.

Post-reconciliation schism:

Critics of the reunification argue that "the hierarchy in Moscow still has not properly addressed the issue of KGB infiltration of the church hierarchy during the Soviet period."

( so.... you are potentially confessing

your sins to the KGB / FSB or FSS in America,

as Russian rules over the USA church jurisdiction in Orthodoxy!!)

Founded in 1794 — Granted Autocephaly in 1970 by Russia  -  denied autocephaly by the Ecumenical Patriarchate.

see Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia [c]

© 2023 by Skyline

207) The Book of Revelation

not part of the canon of scripture.

Revelation and Avoiding History .

The Eastern Orthodox like to see themselves as far better students when studying history than Protestant, Evangelicals and Anabaptists, but they avoid studying history in the way God himself structures the events and topics to be studied in the Book of Revelation, or Apocalypse.

Revelation - Not in the canon of scripture .

When we say "the canon of scripture" the Orthodox once again refuse to conform to pure logic, and have their own definition, which as far as I am aware would be "The canon of scripture is what is inspired and suitable to be read in a (so called) Divine Liturgy". That is immediately a heresy in itself, connecting the canon of scripture to the blasphemy and idolatry of their Liturgy. The basic premise is to distinguish between a book or epistle that is "inspired" and the "canon" and just as they change the meaning  of the word grace to the absurd definition "the uncreated energies of God" they change the meaning of "the canon of scripture" by linking it to the Liturgy, and thus as they historically never gave the bible to the public, the public would never hear the Book or Revelation even in a Liturgy, and thus potentially thoughtfully and prayerfully conclude that the various Orthodox churches are the daughters of the Whore of Babylon (Rome).

The Historic School of Prophecy .

My beliefs about what the best interpretations of the Book of Revelation are, are not always on the same level of definite teachings (thus doctrine) as some of my other beliefs (thus are sometimes persuasions). One day I will have to delineated all the doctrines versus persuasions I have about the Book of Revelation. 

 

The trouble with making sweeping statements like "I am in the historic school of prophecy" or "I believe in the Futurist school of prophecy" is that there are within them so many very different variations it is not saying much. I am more in "The eclectic school" of interpreting Revelation. The Historic School is what the Orthodox most fear its congregation will start to believe, thus they try to sideline the whole book, which when you consider God's threat about undermining the Book of Revelation is very heretical:

"For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book,

If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book: 

And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book." Revelation 22: 18-19 .

One of the very tempting aspects of the Historic School of Prophecy is that it mostly gives you definite, credible interpretations in your hand, right now. The 200 million man attack by the kings of the East, for instance, that kills a third part of men, is the massive army used by Genghis Khan to butcher 40 million people, and the subsequent Mongol rais. The plural "kings of the east" is cited as him uniting the Mongol tribal leaders. The huge 200,000,000 men as far as I know fell far short in the number of soldiers in a single attack, but the Mongol Empire lasted far longer than the reign of Genghis Khan and carried on its raids. This fulfilment seems so strong that a person like me who suggests there will be a single attack of 200 million men at the End of the Age (just before the 1,000 year reign of Christ starts after the Rapture) and that Genghis Khan and the Mongol Empire was just a precursor, sound to some people far fetched - and I have some sympathy with that.  

 

They have after all a very credible interpretation in their hands. That is something the Orthodox do not like, because in history that is spent already, the most likely interpretations of the Mother of Harlots and her daughters has to be Rome, from which the murderous Popes killed millions, and that the logical conclusion is that the Orthodox churches, who are extremely similar in their core centre religious deceptions, are her daughters (Rome is called the Mother of Harlots - so has daughters). This is why Catholics are either Futurist or Preterist but never in The Historical School. The Orthodox on the other hand are actively discouraged from interpreting Revelation by their clerics, which is yet another sin in Orthodoxy in itself.

Killing Christians .

One thing the Futurist and the Historic Schools have in common is this.... 

 

Futurist - Real Christians are killed, some hide in the wilderness, God in his fury unleashes the 7 vials, 7 bowls and 7 trumpets of his wrath (as yet unfulfilled).

Historic - Real Christians are killed by the Roman Catholics, Orthodox and Muslims, but some hide in the wilderness, God in his fury unleashes the 7 vials, 7 bowls and 7 trumpets of his wrath (fulfilled already).

The fact that the Pope and the Titular Head of Orthodoxy are both so welded into the system of this world they would both gladly take a mark, rather than be killed, convinces me the Catholics and the Orthodox will follow suit, take the 666 mark in the future, and, just as they did in the past, will start killing the real Christians who will not take the 666 mark, and persecute them into hiding until the late Rapture occurs. The trading system of the past however was based on religious compromise allowing you to buy and sell in Orthodox and Catholic countries - people seen as "heretics" were simply killed, imprisoned, ostracised, turned into refuges, etc, and anything like Evangelicals would certainly be viewed as heresy.

 

Then there are the Catholic and Orthodox sweeping generalisations. They would have us believe, for instance, that Roman Catholics mass murdering Cathars was justified "because they said the devil himself created the world not God". What if some of them rather simply believed the scripture "For all that is in the world—the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life—is not of the Father but is of the world." 1 John 2:16? A nice sweeping generalisation is enough for the Catholics to burn tens of thousands. The Eastern Orthodox are quite willing, for instance, to immediately lie about me and other Evangelicals and say that as we deny the expression "Mother of God" is appropriate, that means we are all heretics who deny Jesus was fully God as well as man. And also are they saying that the real way to run society is not the freedom of belief we have now?

This site was designed with the
.com
website builder. Create your website today.
Start Now