The European Parliament elections will take place next week. It is expected that among the UK candidates, the Brexit Party, headed by Nigel Farage, will perform well. There are several messages that people who will vote for the Brexit Party wish to send.
- While we remain in the EU, we will resist the proliferation of EU legislation and the concentration of power in EU institutions.
- We are unhappy with the failure of the government and Parliament to take us out of the EU by the end of the two-year notice period triggered by the Article 50 process.
- We distrust the mainstream parties and consider that they have failed to preserve our heritage.
- We seek a return to our traditions of independence, minimal interference, and global relations.
- We are opposed to the dissolution of the nation state.
It is hoped that Brexit Party MEPs, should any be elected, will be able to work with representatives from similar continental parties. The current trends in EU politics and aspirations are concerning.
- Freedom of speech (particularly over the internet)
- Relations with the USA
- The creation of an EU army
- Relations with Russia
- Immigration
- The Ero
- Direct interference with the budgets of Member States
- Relations with Israel
- Rights pertaining to discrimination
The two wings of the EU – left and right – are fundamentally opposed to one another. The right wing may gain a majority of seats in the Parliament or at least enough to offer real resistance to proposed legislation. We shall see.
All Along the Watchtower 
If one believes the polls, which one should be cautious in doing. TBP appears to be taking over. From Guido
https://i1.wp.com/order-order.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/poll-brex.jpg?w=1800&ssl=1
One hopes they are accurate.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Yes, I’ve seen them polling at about 30%, which is pretty good for this sort of election.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Nicholas, slightly off-topic, but I have been working out the numerical value of male names to identify possible candidates for the name of the Beast. I know you are a keen eschatologist.
You might be interested to learn that the following yield 666 (only one name, a female name, yields 616 – ΦΑΕΔΡΑ)
ΒΕΝΕΔΙΚΤΟΣ Benedictos (Benedict – Blessed (Latin origin) – Βενέδικτος)
ΔΗΜΑΡΕΤΗΣ Dimaretis (He who benefits people with his actions – (Ancient Greek origin) – Δημαρέτης)
ΛΑΤΕΙΝΟΣ Lateinos (Latin – Coming from Latio – (Latin origin) – Λατείνος) – though I note that the more usual spelling ΛΑΤΙΝΟΣ does not yield 666.
ΘΕΟΔΟΤΗΣ Theodotis (God gives – (Ancient Greek origin) – Θεοδότης)
A consideration that occurs to me is that, in the case of a physical branding of the name, all of these appear to be quite long to fit on the back of a hand in a reasonable sized typeface.
The following nouns also yield 666, and I suppose these could be used as a name in a pinch:
ΠΑΡΑΔΟΣΙΣ Noun: a tradition
ΕΥΠΟΡΙΑ Noun: prosperity
ΠΕΝΤΑΚΙΣ Adverb: five times
I also note that no single word, or combination of two words, in Chapter 13 of the Apocalypse yields the total of 666. So there doesn’t appear to be any hidden “clue” there.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Interesting research. I have attempted to use gematria myself to find some possible indication, but remain stumped. I dare say you are familiar with the Nero calculation used by those who propose Revelation was composed during his reign. For my part, I tend to favour a date during the reign of Domitian for composition.
I personally think this is not something we can know in toto a priori. We can produce lists that seem to work, but we are faced with the problem of futurism: the subject has yet to be positively identified. The question of who the person is seems to me a synthetic proposition, so we will have to wait for fulfilment to have a posteriori confirmation.
There are some questions that remain unsettled for me.
1) Is the verse to be understood as stating two forms of the mark – number or name – or is mark itself a form? E.g. could a symbol be used in lieu of the above?
2) Does the gematria work for one system of writing or more, and if so, which one(s)? Some have attempted it with Hebrew.
3) Which beast does the name pertain to, the beast from the sea or the beast from the earth?
4) Is the beast from the earth a person, the Antichrist, or just the empire?
I think we will be able eventually to answer these questions (and others) by contextual reasoning. We will be able to recognise enough of these elements when we see them to make inferences to answer the parts we are not sure about. It seems likely, if we are to interpret the words as literally as possible, that some form of internet banking will be involved here, maybe a cryptocurrency.
LikeLike
1. My reading is that the text refers to individuals giving themselves the mark of the name or the number of the name. As the term used is redolent of language used around the indelible character χαραγμα of baptism, it could refer to thought (forehead) and deed (hand), or the effect of some kind of anti-sacrament, rather than to a physical mark.
2. Greek is the only language extant with an intact numeral system which covers all letters of the alphabet AND where transliteration of names (including vowels) can be done securely into the Latin alphabet, with which most of the world is conversant.
Hebrew is possible but unlikely. I find it interesting the NERON KESAR and NERO KESAR add up to 666 and 616 respectively, but NERON is a corrupt form (I think?) so the textual corruption of 616 might have been caused by a too-clever-by-half scribe reading 616 back into the text from Nero’s name.
In any case, Nero is certainly not the beast. The battle of Armageddon is a future event, as is the event of the 200,000,000 horsemen.
3. The beast from the sea. The false prophet – beast from the earth – induces the nations to worship the best from the sea. It would be strange indeed if that worship were mediated by a mark of the vicar rather than his principal.
4. The beast is both. King and kingdom together are the “complete” beast. The body without the head is impotent; the converse is also true.
Heading out with the children briefly, but will be back later this afternoon to continue!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Of further interest are the factors of the number 666.
333 yields ΑΚΡΑΣΙΑ (lack of self-control, self-indulgence)
222 yields ΜΑΙΝΟΜΑΙ (I rage)
111 yields ΘΑΡΑ the wicked son of Nahor
6 is the number of ΑΒΒΑ
Αs 666 is subordinate to 888 – the number of the name of Jesus – so 555 is subordinate to 666. The Apocalypse makes clear that Satan serves the Beast, as he would not serve God.
The number 555 yields
ΕΠΙΘΥΜΙΑ Noun: eager desire, passion, lust
ΔΙΑΚΡΙΣΙΣ Noun: the act of passing judgment, distinguishing
ΠΡΟΣΔΟΚΙΑ Noun: an expectation
ΕΠΙΛΟΙΠΟΣ Adjective: left, remaining, rest
ΕΠΙΟΡΚΟΣ Adjective: a perjurer
DRAKONTI Dat. singular; belonging to the Dragon
All by ΠΡΟΣΔΟΚΙΑ eminently applicable to the workers of dark arts.
The pentangle of course is the pre-eminent symbol of the occult.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I think an Islamic referrent for the end times scenario is the most likely on the information currently available to us. You may wish to investigate whether the Eastern Roman Christians have produced any information that works in Greek regarding Islam. There were writers who recorded the Islamic invasion of the Eastern Roman Empire (including some reports that seem to indicate Mohammed invaded the Levant, seeming to contradict the Islamic accounts of his final years). I know they came up with an etymology of Saracen as “devoid of Sarah”, because Ishmael, Mohammed’s ancestor and line of salvation according to the Islamic narrative, was born to Hagar and not Sarah. I think it a false etymology, but it indicates they were trying to use the bible to understand the events they witnessed.
LikeLike
I am working with the theory that the part of the Empire that was overcome first by schism and then by Islam (the Eastern Empire and North Africa) is the Sea, and the remainder – the territory of the Latin Church – is the Earth.
This would make sense, if the false prophet is in fact a false pope. It also locates Babylon in the Earth. Jerusalem, by contrast, is in the Sea.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have been wondering with Scoop over the question of whether Jorge Bergoglio will turn out to be the False Prophet. Realistically, I think the Antichrist has to come from the Middle East, and that means he is more likely to claim to be the Mahdi than Christ returned or the model Catholic King.
LikeLike
I think he may pull off what Mahomet reportedly (per the Armenian Bishop Sebeos) tried, namely, presenting himself as a messianic figure to reunite the sons of Ishmael and Isaac.
If he resolves the Middle-east crisis, that might induce multiple kings to yield their power to him at once.
Mr Shoebat points out that the colours associated with the 200,000,000 horsemen are the heraldic colours of the Ottoman Empire.
It is also significant to me that the peoples of the eastern Ottoman Empire are renowned and feared horsemen. Genghis Khan ravaged huge swathes in his time, and perhaps he foreshadows the activity of the 200m.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is also interesting that the colours of the four horsemen are colours used in Islamic flags and flags of Middle Eastern countries: white, red, black, green – but that may be coincidence. John and previous generations could not have known this – of course, that is an argument for it being truly prophetic.
LikeLike
That’s an interesting point. However, the nation of Israel was exterminated by the Romans in the first instance, not by the Muslims. Assuming there is a chronological sequence of events described in the seal judgements, the four horsemen coming first, suggests that – after nearly 2000 years – this event should already have happened.
LikeLike
I have suspended my commitment on a number of those points as, in the absence of clear fulfilment, I am conscious of the fact that at the moment we are imposing a priori ideas on the text, so I’m open-minded. That being said, following my reading of Alan Kurshner and other pre-wrath writers, to which school I now belong, I believe the Olivet Discourse, followed by 2 Thessalonians 2 and the Didache, provide us with basic guidance on the overall structure of events.
I remain open-minded about the Roman Empire vs Caliphate debate, but the Caliphate seems the more appropriate given the current data: the OT texts about the Antichrist envision a figure that fits into the Middle Eastern mold:
-The “Assyrian”
-Gog of Magog
-The King of the North (viz the Seleucid basileus)
-The King of Babylon
-Etc
Admittedly, the precise nature of these analogies is difficult to pin down. It could simply be the case that the Middle East is what the Hebrews were familiar with, so God inspired the Prophets to draw on the examples of tyranny the knew, rather than being explicit about the actual geography of the Antichrist. But, in the absence of more information, the default position should be to take the texts as indicating a ruler of the Middle East.
LikeLike
Do you believe that the Millenium and the new Jerusalem represent a restored paradise on earth, or do you think they are a figure for the Church militant today, or do you think they depict the condition of heaven proper?
LikeLike
I take the view propounded in the early church by writers such as Hippolytus and Justin Martyr, before Jerome and Augustine of Hippo came along. I understand the Millennium as the Sabbath Day before the restoration of the heavens and the earth (David Pawson discusses this in his book “When Jesus Returns”). It is the promised Messianic reign discussed in the OT and is a second Garden of Eden in the sense of being a test. The rebellion of mankind at the end of the Millennium following Satan’s release shows that natural man, even when Christ rules, is still sinful. The human heart is incurably wicked. I also believe that the conditions in Israel during the Millennium may be superior to the rest of the earth, but the rest of the earth will still be pretty good. Following the Millennium comes the Last Judgment and the transformation of the whole earth into a true new paradise.
LikeLike
Do you identify the second coming with the great with throne judgement or the defeat of Antichrist?
LikeLike
As a premillennialist, I identify it with the defeat of Antichrist and place the Great White Throne at the end of the Millennium following the defeat of Gog and Magog, who are gathered by Satan when he is released from the Abyss.
It remains unclear to me whether John’s Gog and Magog is Ezekiel’s Gog of Magog or an analogy, saying that it is like Ezekiel’s.
LikeLike
I agree with you, and I would say that Gog and Magog are the same for both passages.
The accounts are consistent.
It is interesting that in the Old Testament account the city of Jerusalem has no walls.
The gates of the New Jerusalem – symbolically – are open by day, and there is, again, symbolically, no night.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This question is usually where people interest in eschatology go separate ways, because Ezekiel’s language is also found in the Armageddon passage in Revelation 19 (feasts for the birds, etc).
Therefore, some dispense with the Millennium as purely symbolic or have it as occurring over (a portion of) the present Church Age. They conflate Armageddon with Gog and Magog of Revelation 20 and Ezekiel 38-39.
Others keep the Millennium, but have Armageddon and Gog and Magog separate. This group the bifurcates into those who have Ezekiel and John referring to the same thing, an event following the Millennium, and those who hold that Ezekiel’s Gog of Magog is a figure who appears before the Antichrist.
Then there are those who say that John is saying the Revelation 20 event is like the Ezekiel event, and the Ezekiel event corresponds with Armageddon. Joel Richardson falls into this camp. NB: he breaks Ezekiel’s passage into an extended complex covering the invasion of Israel before the Abomination of Desolation (just as Antiochus Epiphanes did) and ending with the Battle of Armageddon approx. 3.5 years later when the Lord physically returns.
Some people, e.g. Darrin Ball, think that Ezekiel’s event is actually split between a portion that starts before Christ returns, and then is resumed, as John describes, at the end of the Millennium.
LikeLike
Well, I think the flaming mountain cast into the sea at the second trumpet is the Islamic conquest of the old territory of the Eastern empire.
A mountain in prophetic language is a military or other great power. Fire suggests the false light of Lucifer, infernality, and unwholesome passion, which is characteristic of religious fanaticism. The blood speaks for itself, but I find the destruction of the ships in the sea particularly significant. A ship may be seen (again, credit to Fr Kramer and Steven Paul) as a figure for a church, not qua congregation but qua physical building.
The expansion of Islam occasioned, besides a great slaughter, also the destruction of many churches.
LikeLike
Do you take more of a historicist view of Revelation and keep the futurist interpretation for a smaller subset than what I use it for?
LikeLike
I think the event of the 200 million horsemen is still future.
I believe that 5 of the 7 trumpets have sounded. The star fallen from heaven given the key to the shaft of the abyss is undoubtedly Luther, and this fits in strict chronology with St Vincent Ferrer’s self-identification as an angel of the apocalypse, who himself frequently repeated the phrase WOE WOE WOE and warned (as I understand; I need to check this with the sources) of the impending onset of the locust plague. Luther flourished immediately shortly after the death of St Vincent.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have noted that a lot of Catholic and Orthodox sites try to argue that a belief in an earthly millenium has been condemned by the church in the condemnation of the Apollinarian heresy, but referring to the relevant council documents I find no explicit reference to it, nor does it seem to be this that really attracted the council’s ire, but Apollinarius’ Christological heresies.
LikeLiked by 1 person
That has actually been debunked by Protestant scholarship. I read an academic article on it some years back. I would need to find it for you, though, as I do not have it to hand.
I am aggrieved by the heresy propounded by Augustine of Hippo on that point. It is unforunate that St Jerome also condemned millennialism as he is otherwise very good on eschatological material.
LikeLike
Saints don’t get everything right.
LikeLike
No, indeed, they do not. But I rather suspect that the resurrected saints would not refuse a call to pilgrimage.
LikeLike
Sorry, what has been debunked?
LikeLike
The view that chiliasm was officially condemned as heresy by the ecumenical councils.
https://bible.org/article/phantom-heresy-did-council-ephesus-431-condemn-chiliasm
LikeLike
Yes, and even if it had been, that would only exclude belief in the personal direct reign of Christ on earth – not rule through His saints.
The resurrection of the “first-fruits” makes no sense if this is not in fact a foretaste of the resurrection of the just. A foretaste is anterior in time.
LikeLike
Ah yes – I have read that article.
I have just completed my own (as yet unpolished) translation of the apocalypse.
I intend to prepare it as a bi-lingual version, then annotate it with the commentaries of Fr Kramer and Steven Paul.
The fact that Fr Kramer’s book received Nil Obstat in the 1950s – notwithstanding it advances a theory of a literal millenium – is proof that the Church does not absolutely condemn this view. It’s just not a common view.
Having done this, I intend to test their theories myself and tie them back to the old testament where possible.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I am grateful that the CC has not officially denounced chiliasm. Unfortunately the influence of Augustine of Hippo is still widespread and this is one factor, among others, that puts me off Catholicism.
LikeLike
St Augustine casts a long shadow, but there’s been a lot of water under the bridge since his day.
St Augustine is a doctor of the Church; but so is St Thomas Aquinas – the doctor par excellence – and even he was mistaken about the immaculate conception.
LikeLiked by 1 person
There is very little that I like in St Augustine. I am opposed to his cessationist view of miracles, which the Lord Himself rebuked by performing miracles in St Augustine’s congregation. I do not agree with his interpretation of what St Paul says about original sin in Romans, and I do not like his interpretation of the Millennium. In general, I have concerns about the lingering influence of his pre-Christian manichaeism on his thinking.
LikeLike
Fair enough.
All you have to believe to be a Catholic is what you have to believe.
I haven’t read enough of St Augustine to even comment about him.
LikeLiked by 1 person
You should know that, unless a doctrine has 1) been evidently continually held by a moral unanimity of the Church since the year dot or 2) been continually held in the Church, disputed, then dogmatically defined
you are not obliged to follow it and you have full liberty to question (prudently) according to your own ability.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I should credit the theory re land v sea to the late Steven Paul, a Catholic layman, to whose book The Apocalypse Letter by Letter I am indebted.
Part of his argument for this however seems dicey. He notes that when the devil stands on the sand of the sea, the word for sand is αμμος (sandy soil, dunes, or sand) rather than ψαμμος (sand, seashore, sea-sand).
My problem with this argument is that the same word is used in chapter 20:8 to illustrate the number of Gog and Magog.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I personally do not tend to view slight variations like that as interpretively significant. Given the overwhelming use of the OT and intertestamental literature in the Revelation (e.g. 1 Enoch, Tobit, etc), the wisest course of action seems to be to start with what the OT tells you about symbolism (if you can find a discursive passage) and build up from there. The Sea is used in Daniel, whence the Four Beasts emerge, but unfortunately, the passage does not tell us more than that, and nowhere do we find something explicitly telling us what the land means. But since the land most often referenced in the OT is Israel/Canaan, I can understand people inferring the beast from the land as coming somehow from Israel.
LikeLike
If the land referenced is the territory of Israel in the Old Testament, it makes sense to me that the land should be the territory of the Church in the New Testament.
The conversion of the Jews will restore Jerusalem to her rightfully place, at the crown and summit of the Church; especially if Babylon the Great is Rome reverted to Paganism, which is utterly destroyed.
The Church would have no choice but to relocate her headquarters, and following the defeat of Antichrist and the conversion of the Jews in Jerusalem, Jerusalem would seem the natural choice.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I believe that Jerusalem will be the seat of Christ’s government during the Millennium, when He will sit upon the throne of His father, David, as Gabriel said, drawing on the OT, when he prophesied to the Blessed Virgin Mary.
I am unsure of whether Europe is the final empire or whether it is something else: it is curious that the EU building should be shaped like the tower of Babel and that Europa riding Zeus as the bull should happen to be a woman riding a beast, as Babylon rides the Beast from the Sea / Scarlet Beast in Revelation 17.
LikeLike
I believe Jerusalem will be the seat of Christ’s government, but that He will govern through His Church, and not in person.
When he comes to defeat Antichrist, this is not on the mount of Olives. But the angel said that as He ascended, so He would come again. We believe He will come again to judge the living and the dead; He does that on the Great White Throne.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes, I believe during the Millennium that Christ will delegate the rule of the nations to His resurrected saints, who will liase with non-resurrected people. The resurrected will not disobey Christ, but the unresurrected may. There is a passage in Zechariah that speaks of the Lord refusing to send rain on Egypt because it refused to send a delegation to Israel to celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I have Catholics that attend my discussion groups who are mass going Catholics and help out in the community who love Pope Francis. They are cut from more of the liberal Cloth, so I try to incorporate positive messages from Pope Francis into the discussion group that are also found in more orthodox circles of Catholicism.
Pope Francis hasn’t made a clear break with doctrine. He tiptoes the line. Of course, Scoop will tell you this is a development of South American Peronist politics. But until he takes that full step, I will use him as an avenue for the faith for others. It’s sadly a bit Machievallien, but my loyalty is to Christ, His Gospel, and his sheep.
LikeLike