Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

Author Topic: The Precursor vs The Mark  (Read 18327 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Miser Peccator

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4351
  • Reputation: +2041/-458
  • Gender: Female
Re: The Precursor vs The Mark
« Reply #15 on: November 27, 2021, 11:23:09 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I don't believe the actual Mark itself will be an vaccine or "medicine", given that these treatments are taken from a supposed self-interest (personal health) perspective. Meanwhile, the Mark of the Beast will be an exterior pledge of allegiance if you will to another being and/or his system.

    I've wondered about this too.

    Does Scripture say that the Mark is a pledge of allegiance we knowingly take?  That's what I always thought but perhaps that was reading into it.

    It does say that God will send a grand delusion to those who love not truth.
    I exposed AB Vigano's public meetings with Crowleyan Satanist Dugin so I ask protection on myself family friends priest, under the Blood of Jesus Christ and mantle of the Blessed Virgin Mary! If harm comes to any of us may that embolden the faithful to speak out all the more so Catholics are not deceived.



    [fon

    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 32949
    • Reputation: +29256/-597
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Precursor vs The Mark
    « Reply #16 on: November 27, 2021, 11:29:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • .
    There is no such thing as being transhuman. A human being is a human being and will remain one until he dies.
    .
    The mark of the beast is a mark that is given to people who worship the beast. This drug is given to everyone who wants it, and there is nobody worshiping the beast anyway since the beast is not publicly manifested now anyway.

    This.

    There can be no mark of the beast without a Beast whose mark it is. Where is the Antichrist? What country is he in right now? What is his name?
    Crickets.
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    My accounts (Paypal, Venmo) have been (((shut down))) PM me for how to donate and keep the forum going.


    Offline Matthew

    • Mod
    • *****
    • Posts: 32949
    • Reputation: +29256/-597
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Precursor vs The Mark
    « Reply #17 on: November 27, 2021, 11:31:46 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • There is disagreement on the timeline.

    St John Eudes and the Early Church Fathers held that the reign of Mary comes after the Anti-Christ unlike the other prophecies that state it comes before.

    Nevertheless -- whether the Antichrist comes before or after the Chastisement and the period of peace (Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary),

    HE AIN'T HERE YET.

    That's my point. He has to be manifested to the world, before he can put himself out in the Temple (in Jerusalem) as god to be worshiped, have people adore him, OR take his Mark.
    Want to say "thank you"? 
    You can send me a gift from my Amazon wishlist!
    https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

    My accounts (Paypal, Venmo) have been (((shut down))) PM me for how to donate and keep the forum going.

    Offline Miser Peccator

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 4351
    • Reputation: +2041/-458
    • Gender: Female
    Re: The Precursor vs The Mark
    « Reply #18 on: November 27, 2021, 11:59:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Nevertheless -- whether the Antichrist comes before or after the Chastisement and the period of peace (Triumph of the Immaculate Heart of Mary),

    HE AIN'T HERE YET.

    That's my point. He has to be manifested to the world, before he can put himself out in the Temple (in Jerusalem) as god to be worshiped, have people adore him, OR take his Mark.

    That's my question.  Is it possible to take his mark before he is made known?

    Angelus indicates the mark is being pushed by the False Prophet (Bergoglio) .

    Perhaps the AC will be introduced soon.

    Perhaps people are deceived into taking the mark before the introduction of the AC---the grand delusion that God sends to those who don't love truth so they will believe lies.

    Just sifting through it here...

    The Internet of Things is real and it's their very detailed and clearly stated plan.  It's also very clear they are putting it into place and want humans hooked up to it. 

    Soon in order to buy and sell or get utilities you will have to be physically connected to the cloud with your body.

    It's also proven that graphene is in the shots and graphene can be used for connecting humans to the internet.

    Perhaps after a grid down people will be given the option at that time to opt in or out to getting their UBI and utilities and that will be when you knowingly submit to the Beast and get linked in.

    Everyone will probably have a barcode with the 666 in it.






    I exposed AB Vigano's public meetings with Crowleyan Satanist Dugin so I ask protection on myself family friends priest, under the Blood of Jesus Christ and mantle of the Blessed Virgin Mary! If harm comes to any of us may that embolden the faithful to speak out all the more so Catholics are not deceived.



    [fon

    Offline DigitalLogos

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8304
    • Reputation: +4718/-754
    • Gender: Male
    • Slave to the Sacred Heart
      • Twitter
    Re: The Precursor vs The Mark
    « Reply #19 on: November 28, 2021, 04:13:22 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Bergoglio and these fake Popes are in themselves a TYPE of the False Prophet (despite the interesting connections made, MHFM is wrong in saying that JPII was THE Antichrist). But, as Fr. Berry teaches, the False Prophet only arrives after the apparent death of the Beast in order to develop and spread the cult of worship of the Beast, which entails the Mark and the animated idols of his image.

    We do not have an Antichrist proclaiming himself as god. We do not have a Temple of his worship where this proclamation is made (unless the Abrahamic Religion center in Abu Dhabi is it). Therefore, without these, we cannot say there is a Mark yet being forced. What we are seeing is the foundation, the groundwork, of what most likely will be used by Antichrist to enforce his kingdom.
    "Be not therefore solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof." [Matt. 6:34]

    "In all thy works remember thy last end, and thou shalt never sin." [Ecclus. 7:40]

    "A holy man continueth in wisdom as the sun: but a fool is changed as the moon." [Ecclus. 27:12]


    Offline Angelus

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1197
    • Reputation: +507/-99
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Precursor vs The Mark
    « Reply #20 on: November 28, 2021, 04:27:52 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Bergoglio and these fake Popes are in themselves a TYPE of the False Prophet (despite the interesting connections made, MHFM is wrong in saying that JPII was THE Antichrist). But, as Fr. Berry teaches, the False Prophet only arrives after the apparent death of the Beast in order to develop and spread the cult of worship of the Beast, which entails the Mark and the animated idols of his image.

    We do not have an Antichrist proclaiming himself as god. We do not have a Temple of his worship where this proclamation is made (unless the Abrahamic Religion center in Abu Dhabi is it). Therefore, without these, we cannot say there is a Mark yet being forced. What we are seeing is the foundation, the groundwork, of what most likely will be used by Antichrist to enforce his kingdom.

    The Antichrist is a real man. In fact, it is every man who worships himself (or mankind) rather than the Holy Trinity. He thinks that Jesus was a "really good teacher" because he sacrificed himself for other men. We should do the same to overcome all the problems that the world is facing--especially climate change, racism and anti-semitism. He learned this "doctrine of Jesus the man who becomes a god" by attending the Novus Ordo and reading all the magisterial docuмents of "Pope St. John Paul II" and "Pope Francis." 

    Regarding the "groundwork," please read this post on that subject. And yes, by my definition above, JPII was "the Antichrist" but so are all other men who share his views expressed in the encyclical Redemptor Hominis, which by the way includes all of those believers in the current religion of "woke."

    Offline DigitalLogos

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8304
    • Reputation: +4718/-754
    • Gender: Male
    • Slave to the Sacred Heart
      • Twitter
    Re: The Precursor vs The Mark
    « Reply #21 on: November 28, 2021, 04:30:32 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The Antichrist is a real man. In fact, it is every man who worships himself (or mankind) rather than the Holy Trinity. He thinks that Jesus was a "really good teacher" because he sacrificed himself for other men. We should do the same to overcome all the problems that the world is facing--especially climate change, racism and anti-semitism. He learned this "doctrine of Jesus the man who becomes a god" by attending the Novus Ordo and reading all the magisterial docuмents of "Pope St. John Paul II" and "Pope Francis."

    Regarding the "groundwork," please read this post on that subject. And yes, by my definition above, JPII was "the Antichrist" but so are all other men who share his views expressed in the encyclical Redemptor Hominis, which by the way includes all of those believers in the current religion of "woke."
    I never said he wasn't a real man. I'm saying that he is not yet revealed. I essentially agree with all that you've said. I just don't believe THE Antichrist has been revealed, nor has the Mark been implemented.
    "Be not therefore solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof." [Matt. 6:34]

    "In all thy works remember thy last end, and thou shalt never sin." [Ecclus. 7:40]

    "A holy man continueth in wisdom as the sun: but a fool is changed as the moon." [Ecclus. 27:12]

    Offline Angelus

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1197
    • Reputation: +507/-99
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Precursor vs The Mark
    « Reply #22 on: November 28, 2021, 04:44:36 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I never said he wasn't a real man. I'm saying that he is not yet revealed. I essentially agree with all that you've said. I just don't believe THE Antichrist has been revealed, nor has the Mark been implemented.

    I understand what you are saying. I am disagreeing that "the Antichrist" has not been revealed. The Antichrist is most of the world elite and their enablers, who are persecuting those faithful to the Holy Trinity and the authentic magisterium.
     
    All of those people are "the Antichrist" because the governments and corporations are not enabled by a single man in our world. There is no Roman emperor in democratic-socialist societies. The "people" manipulated by the elite and their media propaganda machine enable the entire Antichristian apparatus, the multi-tentacled Leviathan. Those who are on-board with the religion of woke and covidocracy are "the Antichrist" because without their support, the craziness would not be happening.

    I know this sounds "out there." So I can understand if you disagree with me. I think it will become clearer as we move forward.


    Offline DigitalLogos

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8304
    • Reputation: +4718/-754
    • Gender: Male
    • Slave to the Sacred Heart
      • Twitter
    Re: The Precursor vs The Mark
    « Reply #23 on: November 28, 2021, 04:48:37 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • I understand what you are saying. I am disagreeing that "the Antichrist" has not been revealed. The Antichrist is most of the world elite and their enablers, who are persecuting those faithful to the Holy Trinity and the authentic magisterium.
     
    All of those people are "the Antichrist" because the governments and corporations are not enabled by a single man in our world. There is no Roman emperor in democratic-socialist societies. The "people" manipulated by the elite and their media propaganda machine enable the entire Antichristian apparatus, the multi-tentacled Leviathan. Those who are on-board with the religion of woke and covidocracy are "the Antichrist" because without their support, the craziness would not be happening.

    I know this sounds "out there." So I can understand if you disagree with me. I think it will become clearer as we move forward.
    That is the Mystery of Iniquity, we were warned there would be false prophets and false Christs. But there will be a singular man who will embody this spirit, known as the Antichrist. The Fathers and theologians are clear about this.
    "Be not therefore solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof." [Matt. 6:34]

    "In all thy works remember thy last end, and thou shalt never sin." [Ecclus. 7:40]

    "A holy man continueth in wisdom as the sun: but a fool is changed as the moon." [Ecclus. 27:12]

    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11528
    • Reputation: +6477/-1195
    • Gender: Female
    Re: The Precursor vs The Mark
    « Reply #24 on: November 28, 2021, 05:01:08 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • The connection is that "Babylon" in Chapter 18 is the code word in the Apocalypse for the Counterfeit Catholic Church, aka One World Church, which we can see is almost completely ripe with the Abu Dhabi Docuмent/Abrahamic Family House and Fratelli Tutti, in which our "elder brothers" and all manner of Christ's enemies are claimed to be our "brothers." This error will define the period of Antichrist. It will appear to the clueless masses that the Church that Jesus founded has finally become "woke."

    The Mark of the Beast is pushed by the Beast from the Earth, aka The False Prophet of the Counterfeit Catholic Church. Bergoglio, the Beast of the Earth, has been pushing it as an act of charity. He will continue to do so and soon no one without the jab will be able to enter a "Catholic" church, and we can see the trajectory of the secular governments regarding buying and selling.
     
    The mention of "dying by the sword" (Apocalypse 6 and 13) in the Apocalypse should be translated as "dying from the jab." The word translated "sword" in this case is machaira. A machaira is a short dagger/knife used to "jab" or "stab" an opponent. St. John would not have had a word for hypodermic syringe/needle, so machaira/knife was the only word he could use. St. Jerome translated the greek machaira to the Latin gladius. Look at this page and you can see how the gladius resembles a hypodermic needle/syringe. The sharp point of the machaira-type knife would also have been for tattooing in Roman times.

    We are absolutely in the period spoken of in the Apocalypse. It will be undeniable soon enough.
    The verdict is still out, but this post is quite interesting indeed.  

    Offline Angelus

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1197
    • Reputation: +507/-99
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Precursor vs The Mark
    « Reply #25 on: November 28, 2021, 05:27:33 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • That is the Mystery of Iniquity, we were warned there would be false prophets and false Christs. But there will be a singular man who will embody this spirit, known as the Antichrist. The Fathers and theologians are clear about this.

    2 Thessalonians 2 speaks of "the man of sin," "the son of perdition, and "the wicked one." This is the "singular" guy correct? I agree. I believe that "singular" guy is referred to as "the False Prophet" in the Apocalypse. Same guy? I think so. There is no singular mention of "the Antichrist" anywhere in Scripture. The only mention in Scripture of the word "Antichrist" is in 1 John and 2 John (see here). All of those instances are referring to any men who hold certain false beliefs about Jesus.

    I believe "the False Prophet" is/will be "Antichrist" (as defined in 1 and 2 John) in his beliefs and actions. He is a singular person and he establishes the whole "reign of Antichrist" because he has the (apparent) power to do so as the usurper "Pope." I believe that person is Bergoglio. Those who follow Bergoglio in his errors, I believe, are also Antichrist in their beliefs and actions.


    Offline 2Vermont

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 11528
    • Reputation: +6477/-1195
    • Gender: Female
    Re: The Precursor vs The Mark
    « Reply #26 on: November 30, 2021, 03:13:29 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • That is the Mystery of Iniquity, we were warned there would be false prophets and false Christs. But there will be a singular man who will embody this spirit, known as the Antichrist. The Fathers and theologians are clear about this.
    Is what the Fathers and theologians taught about the Anti-Christ/Mark of the Beast, etc. considered infallible Church teaching?  Or is there room for speculation since it does not appear to be settled doctrine?


    Offline DigitalLogos

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 8304
    • Reputation: +4718/-754
    • Gender: Male
    • Slave to the Sacred Heart
      • Twitter
    Re: The Precursor vs The Mark
    « Reply #27 on: November 30, 2021, 04:10:04 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Is what the Fathers and theologians taught about the Anti-Christ/Mark of the Beast, etc. considered infallible Church teaching?  Or is there room for speculation since it does not appear to be settled doctrine?
    It depends on whether the Fathers were unanimous, which I don't recall offhand if this is one of those points. That said, there's room for speculation, of course, as both the interpretations of Fr. Berry and Fr. Herman Kramer vary on several points, even when compared with the compendium of prophecies from Yves Dupont. Yet, this does not mean we should delve right into the Modern reading of Scripture and assume that these references are all figurative.

    It is correct to state that there are always lesser, archetypical antichrists in any given era, but the context of St. Paul in 2 Thessalonians speaks of a singular Man of Sin, which the Fathers identify as THE Antichrist. 
    Fr. Berry agrees with this point, citing Suarez:
    Quote
    Nevertheless it is certain, in fact Suarez holds it as an article of faith, that Antichrist is a definite individual. The words of St. Paul to the Thessalonians leave no room for doubt in this matter. -The Apocalypse of St. John, p. 130; ref. 2 Thess. 2:3-9.

    A few excerpts of Fr. Kramer on the matter of Antichrist's individual nature:
    Quote
    His idea of Antichrist is exactly that of St. Paul, that he is not on impersonal power but a man. “Little children, it is the last hour: and as you have heard that Antichrist cometh, even now there are become many antichrists” (1 Jo. II. 18, 22; IV. 3). St. Paul had expressed the same view: “unless there come a revolt first and the man of sin be revealed . . . etc.” (2 Thess. II.), leaving no doubt of its being a man. -The Book of Destiny, p. 19
    Quote
    The ancient Fathers identify the Beast with Antichrist. Irenaeus says he will establish his capital at Jerusalem (Adv. Haer. V. xxv. 4); Hippolytus in his treatise on Christ and Antichrist identifies him with the fourth beast of Daniel and also with the Beast of the Apocalypse. Hippolytus was a disciple of Irenaeus, who in turn was well acquainted with Polycarp, a disciple of St. John. Their interpretation of the Apocalypse should therefore have some weight. Modern interpreters largely identify the Beast with the Roman Empire or the Emperor. Such an interpretation is untenable and contradicts itself and the text on many points. -Kramer, p. 260

    The person of Antichrist will be the culmination of all the lesser antichrists throughout history:

    Quote
    The Beast will be a man, “the man of sin”. He will be known as Antichrist when he has established his empire. And this will be the seventh and last of the godless world-empires that promoted idolatry, emperor-worship, devil-worship and persecution of God’s people. He will be the incarnation or embodiment of the beast which in ancient times engendered every blasphemy. Satan was the soul of those empires, and through them he promoted his world-control. Those empires were the Egyptian, the Assyrian, the Babylonian, the Medo-Persian, the Grecian and the Roman. The ruling dynasties of those empires persecuted the people of God and aimed at destroying the true faith and worship. Hence the character of Antichrist, as it were, pre-existed in those ancient dynasties. When he appears in the world in person, his antichristian character will reach the fullest development of evil man. -Kramer, p. 304

    Quote
    The beast is not the aggregate of infidels, heretics, enemies and persecutors of the people of God but a person. He is Antichrist, who had not yet appeared when St. John wrote his first letter (1 Jo. II. 18). St. Paul speaks of the same person, when he says: “he sits in the temple of God, showing himself as if he were God”. This could not be said of a world-power or organization of any kind but only of a person....The height of iniquity is reached when a man poses as God and demands divine honors for himself. Though this was done by rulers of kingdoms and empires, Antichrist will make the boldest pretensions to the possession of divine prerogatives. -Kramer, pp. 306-7

    Furthermore, here is the following that Yves Dupont collected regarding the Antichrist being an individual man (source):

    Quote
    Antichrist will be a human being, a particular man, not a system, a regime or an ideology. We know this for certain from Scripture, from Patristic writings and also from private revelations, although the latter, alone, would not constitute a definite proof.

    • "Christ arose from among the Hebrews, and he (Antichrist) will spring from among the Jews. Christ showed His flesh as a Temple, and raised it up on the third day; and he, too, will raise up again the Temple of stone in Jerusalem." (St. Hippolytus)
    • "Antichrist, the son of perdition will be born in Corozain, will be brought up in Bethsaida and shall begin to reign in Capharnaum, according to what Our Lord Jesus said in the Gospel: "Woe to thee Corozain ... woe to thee Bethsaida ... and thou Capharnaum that art exalted up to heaven, thou shalt be thrust down to hell. (Luke, 10:13) Antichrist shall work a thousand prodigies on earth. He will make the blind see, the deaf hear, the lame walk, the dead rise, so that even the Elect, if possible, shall be deceived by his magical arts. Puffed up with pride, Antichrist shall enter in triumph the city of Jerusalem and will sit on a throne in the Temple to be adored as if he were the Son of God. His heart being intoxicated with arrogance, he will forget his being a mere man, and the son of a woman of the tribe of Dan." (St. Zenobius)
    • "Antichrist will be born of Jєωιѕн parents, of the tribe of Dan, but his mother will not be a virgin, as many believe. As the Holy Ghost came into the heart of Mary, so will the devil enter into the mother of Antichrist, and his diabolical power will always support him. Babylon will be his birthplace, but he will be reared and instructed in Bethsaida and Corozain. After his education at the hands of malignant spirits he will go to Jerusalem and place his seat in the Temple which he will have restored. He will submit to the rite of circuмcision, claiming that he is the Son of the Omnipotent God. His first converts will be kings and princes. His influence will extend from sea to sea, largely through force and persuasive eloquence. He will perform many signs and great miracles. Those who believe in him will be marked on the forehead with a sign. For three and a half years he will hold sway and, at the end of that period, he will put to death Henoch and Elias, who will have previously opposed him by preaching the true faith. Shortly afterwards, Christ will appear, and Antichrist will be killed by Michael the Archangel." (Adso the Monk, 10th Century)
    • "And we beseech you, Brethren, by the coming of Our Lord Jesus Christ and of our gathering together unto Him: that you may not be easily moved from your sense, nor be terrified, neither by spirit, nor by, word, nor by epistle as sent from us as if the day of the Lord were at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means, for unless there come a revolt first and the man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition, who opposeth and is lifted above all that is called God, or that is worshipped, so that he sitteth in the Temple of God, shewing himself as if he were God." (2 Thess., 2:1-4)
    • These few passages suffice to show that Antichrist will be indeed a man. They show also by way of implication that he will not be an atheist for his claim of being God and the Son of God is in itself an acknowledgment that God is not a mythical being as the Communists assert. Further, he will gather together the Jєωιѕн people - hardly what the Communists are endeavouring to achieve. That anyone should say, write, and write again in spite of all remonstrances, that Communism is Antichrist leaves one baffled.
    • I now propose to present further evidence to show the absurdity of such a contention. In each case I invite the Reader to pause and ask himself if these passages fit Communism.
    • "In every respect that Deceiver seeks to make himself appear like the Son of God. Christ is king of things celestial and terrestrial, and Antichrist will be king upon earth. The Saviour sent the Apostles unto all the nations, and he, in like manner will send false apostles. Christ gathered together the dispersed sheep, and he in like manner will gather together the dispersed people of the Hebrews. Christ appeared in the form of man, and he in like manner will come forth in the form of man." (Hippolytus)
    • "This impious man ... will give orders that he himself shall be worshipped as God. For he will say he is Christ, though he will be His enemy. That he may be believed he will receive the power of doing wonders, so that fire may descend from heaven, the sun retire from its course and the image which he shall have set up may speak. And by such prodigies he shall entice many to worship him, and to receive his sign on their hands or foreheads. And he who shall not worship him and receive his sign will die with refined tortures. Thus he will destroy nearly two parts, the third will flee into desolate solitudes. But he, frantic and raging with implacable anger, will lead an army and besiege the mountains to which the righteous shall have fled. And when they shall see themselves besieged, they will implore the help of God with a loud voices and God shall hear them, and shall send to them a Deliverer ..." (Lactantius)

    "Be not therefore solicitous for tomorrow; for the morrow will be solicitous for itself. Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof." [Matt. 6:34]

    "In all thy works remember thy last end, and thou shalt never sin." [Ecclus. 7:40]

    "A holy man continueth in wisdom as the sun: but a fool is changed as the moon." [Ecclus. 27:12]

    Offline Angelus

    • Supporter
    • ***
    • Posts: 1197
    • Reputation: +507/-99
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Precursor vs The Mark
    « Reply #28 on: November 30, 2021, 04:25:10 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
  • Is what the Fathers and theologians taught about the Anti-Christ/Mark of the Beast, etc. considered infallible Church teaching?  Or is there room for speculation since it does not appear to be settled doctrine?

    That would not be infallible Church teaching. There is room for speculation. Different "Fathers" had different opinions on the interpretations of those things.

    If you go to www.aquinas.cc, use the search to find "antichrist" in the English search box. You will see lots of different opinions in the various writings of Aquinas. His Catena Aurea, for example, compares the different opinions of Church Fathers on various Gospel passages, and even though the words "the antichrist" is not in the Gospels, the Fathers believe he is referred to when Jesus speaks of "the false prophets" in Matthew 24.

    In Aquinas, we find "the False Prophet" only referred to when quoting direct passages from the Apocalypse. But clearly, throughout his writings, Aquinas is using "the Antichrist" and "the False Prophet" synonymously. 

    Offline Pax Vobis

    • Supporter
    • *****
    • Posts: 12464
    • Reputation: +7913/-2449
    • Gender: Male
    Re: The Precursor vs The Mark
    « Reply #29 on: November 30, 2021, 10:58:06 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
  • Angelus, you’re a bit mixed up.  There will be 1 antichrist, a man, possessed by Satan.  The Church Fathers are very clear.  And it hasn’t happened yet.