SRR #57 | Eschatology And The Danielic Imperative Part 2

ThornCrown Network iconThornCrown Network

0 views

0 comments

SRR #58 | Eschatology And The Danielic Imperative Part 3

00:02
I do a podcast. I'm not interested in your podcast. Folks, these are wolves.
00:11
Truth be told, I oftentimes lay awake at night trying to figure out how I can get rid of wolves in the church.
00:23
We are unabashedly, unashamedly, Clarkian. And so the next few statements that I'm going to make,
00:29
I'm probably going to step on all of the Vantillian toes at the same time. And this is what we do at Simple Riff around the radio, you know.
00:36
We are polemical and polarizing Jesus style. I would first say that to characterize what we do as fashion is itself fashion.
00:56
It's not hate. It's history. It's not fashion. It's the Bible. Jesus said,
01:06
Woe to you when men speak well of you, for their fathers used to treat the false prophets in the same way, as opposed to blessed are you when you have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness.
01:20
It is on. We're taking the gloves off. It's time to battle. In the first year of Belshazzar, king of Babylon, Daniel saw a dream and visions of his head as he lay in his bed.
01:36
Then he wrote down the dream and told the sum of the matter. Daniel declared, I saw in my vision by night and behold, the four winds of heaven were stirring up the great sea and four great beasts came up out of the sea, different from one another.
01:51
The first was like a lion and had eagle's wings. Then as I looked, its wings were plucked off and it was lifted up from the ground and made to stand on two feet like a man.
02:03
And the mind of a man was given to it. And behold, another beast, a second one, like a bear.
02:09
It was raised up on one side. It had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth. And it was told, arise, devour much flesh.
02:18
After this, I looked and behold another like a leopard with four wings of a bird on its back.
02:24
And the beast had four heads and dominion was given to it. After this, I saw in the night vision and behold, a fourth beast, terrifying and dreadful and exceedingly strong.
02:36
It had great iron teeth. It devoured and broken pieces and stamped what was left with its feet.
02:42
It was different from all the beasts that were before it. And it had ten horns. I considered the horns and behold, there came up among them another horn, a little horn, before which three of the first horns were plucked up by its roots.
02:57
And behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a man and a mouth speaking great things.
03:04
Daniel chapter 7, 1 through 8. This podcast is a member of the Bible Thumping Wingnut Network.
03:10
Alright, welcome everybody to another podcast episode with Semper Reformanda Radio. Hi, welcome to Theology Gals.
03:17
Welcome everyone to the Logical Belief Ministries Podcast. Well, welcome to School of Biblical Harmonetics.
03:23
Welcome everybody to Rappling with Theology. What is going on guys? Shina's Light's coming at you.
03:29
Well, welcome to Slick Answers. Good evening and welcome to Conversations from the
03:35
Port. Hello and welcome to Living in the
03:42
Vine. This is the Council of Google+. Welcome ladies and gentlemen to the Bible Thumping Wingnut Podcast.
03:49
The Bible Thumping Wingnut Network. Twelve podcasts, one network. Check them out at BibleThumpingWingnut .com.
03:57
Looking for that perfect track for your next evangelism outreach? Look no further. At TrackedPlanet .com
04:04
we have solid biblical tracks that are a breeze to hand out. They are beautifully designed and are the highest quality tracks available.
04:12
With over 80 different designs in stock and literally hundreds more available by custom order, we're sure to have just the right one for you.
04:20
You can get any of our items printed with your church or ministry information or have us design a brand new track just for you.
04:27
We are committed to the solid biblical message of law to the proud and grace to the humble. Each track is firm on the resurrection of Jesus Christ and the necessity of repentance and faith in salvation.
04:38
Come check us out at TrackedPlanet .com and make sure you use coupon code BTWN at checkout for 10 % off your entire order.
04:48
That's TractPlanet .com, coupon code BTWN. We are back with Tim Coffman.
04:59
My name is Tim Shaughnessy and this is Semper Reformanda Radio. I hope that you got something out of last week's episode.
05:05
I know that I listened to it probably about three times. Tim, I think there was somebody else who said that they listened to it at least twice and they said that it was fantastic.
05:14
So hey, I'm really grateful that you're here, that you've put in all this time, work and effort and I know that you've been studying this stuff for years.
05:23
So I'm really grateful that you're here. We're going to pick up on part two of looking at the Danielic timeline or chronology.
05:31
The focus of our text was Daniel chapter 7 and we're going to be looking at the fourth piece in particular.
05:37
But before we get into that, and I'm going to ask you to give a little bit of a recap, but before we get into that,
05:44
I want to pose a question to you that we've talked about before and I realize that we didn't address this last week, but that's this.
05:51
Do you, as a former Roman Catholic, find Roman Catholicism in the text just merely because of a personal bias against Rome because you came out of Roman Catholicism?
06:03
Because I think that sometimes we do have a tendency to do that. I know
06:08
I've heard the same thing about Islam. People who convert out of Islam, they want to see
06:15
Islam as the great antagonist, as the Antichrist. And so what we're going to be doing, a lot of it does pertain to Roman Catholicism.
06:25
We are going to be saying things like we do believe that Roman Catholicism is
06:30
Antichrist. We do believe that the Roman Catholic system, the
06:35
Roman Catholic Church, has a role to play in the text of Scripture. And so I want to ask you and give you an opportunity to respond to the notion that there might be a personal bias on your part because you are a former
06:50
Roman Catholic. Well, thank you, Tim. I appreciate the question.
06:55
I appreciate the warm welcome I always receive. I'm glad that people are listening to the episodes and enjoying them.
07:03
I think that the question is a very reasonable one, and it's one that I've encountered many times.
07:08
It's probably important to note that if I were to address the eschatology matter in ignorance, never having experienced
07:20
Roman Catholicism, people might say, well, you don't know what you're talking about because you were never
07:27
Roman Catholic, and you don't understand. If I address the eschatological matters from the perspective of knowledge and experience, having been a
07:36
Roman Catholic, then people can dismiss it saying that you are only doing this because you're angry about Roman Catholicism, you feel like they defrauded you, and now you want to get your vengeance and get back at them, and this is just a personal vendetta against them.
07:50
The reason I offer those two extremes of a spectrum of responses is that I am never going to win the ad hominem argument.
08:01
It's just, you know what, if someone doesn't want to believe this, they're going to find a reason to discredit it, and I accept that.
08:08
There's no use in going down the path of the ad hominem argument, because then I start talking about how even though I have never been
08:16
Roman Catholic, I am eminently qualified based on the diligence of my studies, etc., etc.,
08:21
and then suddenly the whole conversation is defending me and my studies. Or if I say, yes,
08:27
I did come out of Roman Catholicism, I wanted to be a priest, I was taught Marian devotion from a very young age, a cradle
08:34
Catholic, and when I moved to Alabama in 1989, I was a defender of Roman Catholicism to the great irritation of many of my
08:42
Protestant friends, and then I have to start defending the vastness of my experience and knowledge of Roman Catholicism.
08:50
In the end, the question and the objection ends up shifting the conversation from the text of Scripture and the historical record and has it back on me.
09:00
You know what, if people want to assign some sort of personal bias to my conclusions, there's nothing
09:06
I can do to stop them. It's an ad hominem argument, and I want to simply get back to the facts.
09:12
And the facts is what we'll be talking about today. I've often pointed out that almost all of the
09:19
Reformers, if not 100 % of them, at least the major ones, thought that Roman Catholicism was Antichrist, the beast of Revelation 13, the little horn of Daniel 7.
09:28
And when I raise that, people will say, yeah, but the Reformers all had a personal bias against Roman Catholicism too, and so they would be inclined to conclude that Roman Catholicism was the beast of Revelation 13.
09:42
And you know what, we could go forever trying to deny personal bias or embellish our credentials to show that we're eminently qualified to discuss it.
09:54
But this isn't about me. It's not about a personal bias. It's not about having been experienced at Roman Catholicism or not having experience in Roman Catholicism.
10:04
It's about what the apostles warned about and what ended up happening. And that's what we're talking about today.
10:12
Well, and I'll just go ahead and add to that, that I am not persuaded by you because of a personal bias.
10:20
And I've said before that I came out of the Roman Catholic Church. And I know that last week I said that.
10:25
I also said that I grew up Baptist and I used to watch Dr. Jack Van Empey late at night.
10:31
And it might sound contradictory, but my dad's a Roman Catholic. My mom was a Baptist. And my parents actually sent me to a
10:39
Baptist private school because they were both teachers and they appreciated what the private school was doing.
10:48
And so they chose for me to go there. And so as a Roman Catholic coming out of that while in the private school,
10:57
I became engrossed in dispensational theology. And eventually
11:02
I basically stopped calling myself a Roman Catholic and I basically became a born -again
11:09
Christian. And for years I rejected the views that you're talking about because I was coming to the table with my own presuppositions about what the
11:19
Antichrist was going to look like. And I remember that I had a cousin who said, you know, I believe that the Pope is the
11:24
Antichrist. And I immediately rejected it. And I was like, no, this guy's not going to do everything that I saw happen in the movie, you know,
11:33
Left Behind or whatever. And I was like, this guy's not a Nikolai Karpathia or whatever that guy's name is.
11:40
And I just absolutely rejected it. And once again, I point back to the Trinity Foundation. We talked about that last week where I read an article by John Robbins and I started to realize that this is where the reformers landed.
11:54
And so we're going to get into all of that. But this was a view that I actually rejected for a number of years after I became converted.
12:02
And now I'm absolutely convinced of it. And so we're just going to jump right into where we left off last week.
12:09
I believe it was we were looking at the ten horns of the fourth beast and the little horn that comes up and removes three.
12:17
So Tim, I'm going to ask you to lead us in our discussion if you want to give a recap or just wherever you want to take us.
12:25
We'll just give it off to you. Okay. Well, thanks for that introduction. So this is the second half of the first episode,
12:36
I suppose, because we ended up last week at the point where the
12:41
Roman Empire was divided 13 ways. And this matters to us because, as we mentioned last week, when we read in Daniel chapter 7 that the fourth beast had ten horns and then the little horn arises and has removed three of the horns, the way that has traditionally been read, and it's been read this way for maybe 2 ,000 years or longer, that the little horn is going to take three of the ten horns.
13:18
And that's actually something that Daniel never says. He says the little horn comes up among ten, having removed three.
13:26
And if you look at the text, you'll see that he never actually says that the first horns were a total of ten, and he never says that the little horn removes three of the ten horns.
13:40
He says he removes three of the first horns. And the reason that we were able to go back through the text and understand that is because we saw, as we walked through each of the four beasts of Daniel chapter 7, that it was depicted at the conclusion of its reign as an empire just prior to the rise of the next empire.
14:01
So we see the lion is after Nebuchadnezzar has been given his reason back, and he stands on two feet like a man, and his heart is given back to him, and this is being revealed in the first year of his successor, who ends up being the last king of the
14:20
Babylonian Empire. And then the bear is lifted up on one side, and we saw and understood, based on Daniel 8, and our understanding of the two horns of the ram in Daniel chapter 8, that the bear being lifted up on one side was evidence that the
14:35
Persians are already reigning, and the time of the Medes are well behind them. In other words, it's the end of the reign of the
14:43
Medo -Persian Empire. And then we saw the Greek Empire was depicted with four heads, long after the death of Alexander the
14:50
Great, who was the first head. That head is gone, and now there are four remaining, based on Daniel chapter 8.
14:57
We know that it started as one horn, it was broken, four came up in its place, so we end up looking at the leopard of Daniel chapter 7, seeing that the
15:07
Greek Empire is depicted in its final phase, before the rise of the Roman Empire. And so we get to the
15:13
Roman Empire, which is the fourth terrible beast, and it has ten horns. And we notice that the next horn that comes up, has removed three, comes up among ten, and that is the next empire on the earth.
15:30
It is the fifth empire of Daniel's visions. And so each one is depicted as it stood, just before the next empire took over.
15:38
And what we'll find when we examine history today, we'll find that in the end, the little horn did in fact come up, uprooted three of the thirteen horns, and came up among the remaining ten.
15:52
The reason we know that Daniel was aware of, and in fact knew of thirteen horns in Daniel chapter 7, is because if the little horn of Daniel 7 had removed three of the ten horns, there should have only been seven horns remaining.
16:12
And yet what we find in Revelation chapter 17, when the lamb returns, according to the description there, the beast and ten horns have gathered to make war against him.
16:26
If there had only been ten horns total, and the little horn removed three, because that little horn is the beast of Revelation 13, if there had only been ten, and little horn removed three, then in Revelation chapter 17, we should have seen the beast and seven horns gathered to do battle with the lamb.
16:51
But instead there are still ten horns. And this goes back to our discussion on how we approached the text here, is that it has to make sense, it has to be consistent, it has to be logical and coherent, and the only way you can end up with ten horns at the very end, when the lamb returns, and the little horn removing three prior to coming up, is for there to have been thirteen horns, and the little horn comes up, removes three, and then comes up among the remaining ten for a total of thirteen horns.
17:25
So the reason this is very, very significant to us today, because we concluded the last episode by saying that in the latter part of the 4th century, the
17:34
Roman Empire was in fact divided thirteen ways, and there was in fact someone who came up and claimed three of those thirteen geographic regions for himself.
17:43
And that's the guy we're warned about. And it has been historically missed, because historically people have been looking for a ten -way division of the
17:53
Roman Empire, and they were thinking, and this is very consistent in the historical record, among the
17:58
Church Fathers and even among the Reformers, that as soon as the Roman Empire was divided ten ways, that would be the sign that Antichrist was about to rise, and then he would remove three of the ten, and then history would continue just the way it was predicted in Daniel 7 and Revelation.
18:14
The reason this was missed is because they were expecting a ten -way division. When a thirteen -way division occurred, nobody took note.
18:23
And because of that, they missed that there was a guy who came up and claimed three of the thirteen for himself, and came up among the remaining ten.
18:32
And that's where we're going to start today. So what happened in history that caused the Roman Empire to be divided thirteen ways, and when that happened, who claimed three of the thirteen dioceses for himself?
18:44
And that's where we pick up today. So what we're going to start with is why the
18:51
Roman Empire ended up in a place that it had to be divided at all. And it starts in 226
18:57
AD, where Rome finds itself facing Rome the
19:03
Empire, finds itself facing an enemy to the east, the
19:08
Sasanian Empire. They started making incursions in 226 AD and troubled the eastern frontier of the
19:15
Roman Empire for centuries beyond. After the Sasanian Empire arose to the east and started troubling
19:22
Rome, the Roman Empire, from there, the Roman Empire started having internal troubles as well.
19:28
Historically, it's been called the Crisis of the Third Century. And it's a period from 235 to 284
19:34
AD. And during that period of about fifty years, twenty -seven different men claimed to be emperor of the
19:43
Roman Empire. It was a state of continuous civil war. One after another was coming in, taking over Rome, and claiming to be emperor.
19:52
Now in 284 AD, Diocletian came to power, and he decided that he needed to reorganize the
19:59
Empire to stop the ceaseless civil wars, because it was going to be the absolute ruination of the
20:06
Roman Empire unless somebody did something about it. So what he did, he decided that the administrative center of the
20:13
Empire could no longer be Rome, the city. And he divided the
20:19
Empire into four separate sections, each one with a capital city. And this is the beginning of the
20:25
Tetrarchy. And the four capital cities were split between two Caesars and two Augusti.
20:31
And the purpose was to make it absolutely impossible for an army to conquer the Empire, simply by invading a single city.
20:38
In other words, he removed the vulnerability of the Roman Empire. It was vulnerable because anybody could march on Rome, and once they marched on Rome, Rome has a new sheriff in town, and then they start all over again.
20:51
And then the next person comes, and he wants to be in charge of the Empire, so he invades Rome. Well, what Diocletian did was make that impossible.
21:00
He created four separate capital cities, and it was ruled by four
21:05
Tetrarchs in the four Tetrarch capitals. Nicomedia, which is in modern Turkey, Insermium, which is in modern
21:11
Serbia, Mediolanum, which is modern -day Milan in Italy, and Augusta Trevororum in modern -day
21:20
Trier in Germany. Now, each of those four Tetrarch capitals was in charge of three dioceses.
21:27
So, four Tetrarch capitals, each one has three dioceses for a total of twelve dioceses.
21:34
And this was intended to separate the administrative responsibility of the
21:39
Empire from Rome, placing the administrative responsibility at the four capitals.
21:46
So, each diocese had a vicarious, or a vicar, and the vicar was responsible for managing the diocese and reporting to his assigned
21:56
Tetrarch emperor, either a Caesar or an Augustus, depending on which city he was reporting to.
22:04
Now, just to give you an example, Antioch was the capital city of the
22:10
Diocese of Oriens, which literally is the Diocese of the East, and that stretched from Libya all the way to Syria, but that capital city had a vicar, or a count, sometimes it's recorded as a count, that count was responsible for administering the
22:28
Diocese of the East and reported to his Tetrarch leader. Milan was the capital city of the
22:35
Diocese of Italy, and this is very important. I want to make sure we understand this. From the time from about 296
22:43
AD, when the reorganization took place until the latter part of the 4th century, Rome, as a city, was not the capital of the
22:52
Diocese of Italy. It's very important to notice that. Milan was the capital city of the Diocese of Italy, and the vicar of Italy resided in and ruled from Milan, and Milan was also one of the
23:05
Tetrarch capitals. Now, what's interesting about this, if you think about the way the Roman Empire was divided under Diocletian, is that there were top -tier metropolises, or metropoli, like Sirmium, Milan, Trier, and Nicomedia.
23:24
Then there were second -tier metropoli, that were the capital cities of the respective dioceses, like Antioch and Milan.
23:35
Now, Rome was granted titular honors, and in fact had a vicar of its own, who administered a few suburbs of the city of Rome.
23:43
And in fact, we see this reflected in the earliest Latin version of the
23:49
Canons of Nicaea, where it is shown that the bishop of Rome is only responsible for a few suburbs adjacent to the city.
23:59
He's not actually in charge of the entire diocese. And what's very interesting over this period, is we see a correlation between what happens in the administration of the empire in the civil sense, and also the administration of the empire in the ecclesiastical sense, where the bishops who resided in the diocesan capitals, the metropolises of the diocese, ended up being very, very prominent.
24:26
And so the bishop of Antioch was quite prominent. The bishop of Milan was quite prominent.
24:33
And in fact, the bishop of Rome was relegated to a third -tier metropolis, when it came to how the total empire was administered from an ecclesiastical perspective.
24:43
So the point of emphasizing that, it is Milan, not
24:49
Rome, that is the capital city of the Diocese of Italy. And this information is recorded for us in what's called the
24:55
Laterculus Veronensis. It is simply an administrative document from the early part of the 4th century, showing that Diocletian had divided the empire into 12 geographic units.
25:08
Now, over the course of the next century, the Tetrarchy faded away, and there were several administrative changes and reorganizations that took place.
25:19
Some dioceses were combined, others were split in two, and the end result was a 13 -way division of the
25:25
Roman Empire. And that is recorded for us in what's called the Notitia Dignitatum from the latter part of the 4th century, and it shows 13 dioceses as the final division of the
25:35
Roman Empire. And this is a point that's worth emphasizing. Historically, people who are trying to understand
25:44
Daniel have been looking for a 10 -way division of the Roman Empire. This process of Diocletian dividing the
25:51
Roman Empire into 12, and then over the course of the next century, it being reorganized as some dioceses are combined, others are split for a final result of 13 dioceses, nobody would have taken notice because they were looking for a 10 -way split.
26:07
And so the 13 -way division actually occurs and nobody stands up and takes notice. And the reason was is that they had not harmonized
26:15
Daniel 7 with Revelation 17. Daniel 7 says that there were 10 horns and a little horn came up who had removed 3.
26:24
And in Revelation 17, it says the lamb returns and the beast and 10 horns, not 7, have to make war with him.
26:31
And that shows that Daniel knew about 13 horns. He knew the little horn had removed 3 of the first horns, which were 13, leaving 10, because each beast in Daniel 7 is shown just before the next empire rises up.
26:47
And it turns out that 3 of those horns, or 3 of those dioceses, had been basically aggregated by a single entity just before the
26:57
Roman Empire handed off the administration of the empire to the successor. And so I want to emphasize that this 13 -way division can actually be pinpointed in history to a single decade between 373 and 383
27:10
A .D. And as late as 373 A .D., the Roman province of Egypt was still located within the civil diocese of Oriens, and so Alexandria was actually a lower -tier city within the diocese of the east, which was administered from Antioch.
27:27
But by 383 A .D., we have a Roman communication making formal reference to the diocese of Egypt, because the diocese of Egypt had been created by splitting the diocese of the east in two, and so you have the final division of the
27:41
Roman Empire, the 13 ways, between 373 and 383 A .D.,
27:47
with Egypt being administered from Alexandria, the diocese of the east being administered from Antioch, and the diocese of Italy being administered from Milan.
27:58
So that final 13 -way division of the empire happened at the latter part of the 4th century.
28:06
Now, students of church history will also notice that a very important church council took place during the same time period, and that was the
28:15
Council of Constantinople in 381 A .D. The church at Constantinople had called a council, and in the third canon of the
28:24
Council of Constantinople, they declared that because Constantinople is
28:29
New Rome, the Bishop of Constantinople is to enjoy the privileges of honor after the
28:35
Bishop of Rome. Now, this, again, the reason that it even declares, the canon even addresses the issue of New Rome is because the administrative capital of the empire had shifted, and so, having risen in prominence by the end of the 4th century,
28:52
Constantinople dared to claim that it had privileges of honor like that, like the Bishop of Rome, and possibly second only to the
29:00
Bishop of Rome. Well, that created a bit of a stir in Rome, and Rome responded with a council the next year, and this is the point at which
29:12
Roman Catholicism rebuffs Constantinople for claiming that it is equal with Rome or second only to Rome in the empire, and the
29:24
Bishop of Rome responds saying that only the three C's of Peter can claim that privilege and honor, and among them,
29:35
Rome is the first. Okay, so, this is the response of the Council of Rome in 382
29:43
AD, the following year, and this is basically a rebuttal, and basically a rebuffing of the church at Constantinople for thinking above its station, so to speak.
29:56
So, here's what the Council of Rome said. It says, we have also thought necessary to say, although the universal
30:03
Catholic Church diffused throughout the world is the single bride of Christ, however, the Holy Roman Church is given first place by the rest of the churches, without the need for a synodical decision, but from the voice of the
30:15
Lord our Savior in the gospel obtained primacy, that is, citing the words of the gospel, is that you are
30:23
Peter, and upon this rock I shall build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.
30:29
So, here the Council of Rome, I'm speaking parathetically, of course, the Council of Rome is saying, hey, Rome enjoys its prominence because the
30:38
Lord said he would build his church upon Peter, okay? So, continuing now with the
30:45
Council of Rome, it says, therefore, first is the seat at the Roman Church of the Apostle Peter, having no spot or wrinkle or any other defect.
30:55
However, the second place was given in the name of blessed Peter to Mark, his disciple and gospel writer at Alexandria, and who himself wrote down the word of truth directed by Peter the
31:07
Apostle in Egypt and gloriously consummated his life in martyrdom. Indeed, the third place is held at Antioch, of the most blessed and honorable
31:15
Apostle Peter, who lived there before he came to Roma, and where first the name of the new race of the
31:23
Christians was heard, okay? So, he's using the Latin term for Rome, which is
31:29
Roma, and notice what was said at that council, and this is 382
31:35
A .D. It's right smack dab in the middle of this section between 373 and 383
31:41
A .D. that Constantinople was claiming to be equal or second in prominence to Rome, and Rome responds and says, no,
31:52
Jesus said he would found his church on Peter, and Peter came to Rome and died here, and Peter sent his disciple
32:01
Mark to Alexandria, and Peter went to Antioch, which is the place where people were first called
32:08
Christians, and therefore, the seat of authority in the church is possessed by the
32:16
Sees of Peter, Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch. Now, in the next century, a couple centuries later, actually,
32:25
Pope Gregory the Great described these Petrine Sees, and when
32:30
I say the Petrine Sees, it basically means literally the seats of Peter. He described them as a single entity claiming that they were, in fact, a seat of one, and he recites the thinking of the
32:44
Council of Rome in 382. He says, Wherefore, though there are many apostles, yet with regard to the principality itself, the
32:52
See of the Prince of the Apostles alone has grown strong in authority, which in three places is the
32:59
See of One. For he himself exalted the See of Rome, in which he deigned even to rest and end the present life.
33:07
He himself adored the See of Alexandria, to which he sent his disciple Mark as evangelist.
33:13
He himself established the See of Antioch, in which, though he was to leave it, he sat for seven years.
33:19
It is the See of One, and one See, over which by divine authority three bishops now preside.
33:27
That's from Gregory the Great, Book 7, Epistle 40, to Eulogius, Bishop of Alexandria.
33:33
So here, the Bishop of Rome is saying, there are three bishops who rule jointly, the
33:41
Bishop of Rome owning the preeminence, all three of them being a See of One, because they all trace from Peter, and therefore the
33:51
Church is ruled by a See of One, which in fact in three places is a
33:58
See of One, all three of which trace themselves to Peter in some way. And this is not just an ancient doctrine that has long since been forsaken by the
34:06
Church. Pope Benedict in his book, Pope Benedict XVI, he confirmed
34:14
Rome's claim to continuity through Petrine succession and made reference to those same
34:19
Petrine Sees. He says, it was to be a written record of the continuity of apostolic succession, which was concentrated in the three
34:27
Petrine Sees, Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria, among which
34:32
Rome as the site of Peter's martyrdom, was in turn preeminent and truly normative.
34:38
That's from his book, Called to Communion, the Petrine Succession in Rome, that's from that chapter.
34:45
So here we have a situation where the Roman Empire, we have narrowed down a single decade when the
34:53
Roman Empire was divided 13 ways based on our understanding of Daniel chapter 7, this was the point in time when we should take notice, we should identify someone who raises himself up and claims three of them.
35:05
What we have seen is that the Roman Bishop claimed as sitting in the
35:12
See of Peter at Rome, he ruled over the entire church, along with the
35:19
Bishop who sat in Alexandria and the Bishop who sat in Antioch. And what we've noticed, and this will become significant in just a moment,
35:28
Alexandria, of course, by then, was the metropolis of the Diocese of Egypt, Antioch, of course, was the metropolis of the
35:36
Diocese of the East, but Rome wasn't really the metropolis of the
35:42
Diocese of Italy, Milan was. And we're going to, in a few minutes, walk through how the
35:49
Roman Bishop ended up subsuming the three capital cities of the
35:56
Diocese of Italy, Egypt, and the East under himself in order to establish that See of One, thus claiming three of the thirteen dioceses of the
36:07
Roman Empire, and rising up and ruling among the remaining ten. So, are you with me so far,
36:13
Tim? Yeah, that's a lot of good stuff right there.
36:18
I'm going to have to push rewind and listen to that again. I just want to remind everybody, this is some heavy stuff, but Tim has also written an article on this on his blog, whitehorseblog .com.
36:32
The article that we're referring to is titled A See of One, so you can just go to the search column and type in A See of One.
36:40
And then another article, which I think might be of interest, we referenced a point earlier in which
36:49
Tim was saying that this has been missed, and I think that this article written by Tim is also of interest.
36:57
It's titled What the Fathers Feared Most. And so, go ahead and check out that article.
37:04
The fathers feared that they might miss the Antichrist coming, and he does a great job of documenting that from history.
37:14
So, yeah, I'm with you. I've gone through this stuff before, so that's just for our listeners to hang in there with us.
37:23
And really, Tim, there's really nothing that I can add to what you're saying, so I'm just going to get out of the way so that way you can continue on.
37:34
Okay, okay. So, well, this is a lot of interesting information. And I hope people can digest it.
37:41
Perhaps they'll have to listen to it a few times. The notes and other information, basically the essence of the historical documentation for all this can be found on the blog under the various articles.
37:55
But let's address two important issues here. The little horn of Daniel chapter 7 is to assume civil power.
38:06
All the beasts that we have seen in Daniel chapter 7 has civil power.
38:12
The Babylonian Empire, the Medo -Persian Empire, the Greek Empire, the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire ends up being fragmented based on our harmonization of Daniel 7 and Daniel.
38:22
In Revelation 17, we understand that there were in fact 13 horns to start. Three of them were subsumed under a single little horn, which came up among the remaining ten.
38:32
But that little horn is supposed to take on civil power and authority. So we have to ask, when did
38:39
Roman Catholicism become a civil power? Now, in addition to three horns being uprooted, and in this case right now we're talking about the three horns of the
38:50
Diocese of Italy, Egypt, and the East, Daniel chapter 7 also says that this little horn will subdue three kings.
39:01
And if the bishop of Rome had in fact been the bishop of the
39:08
Diocese of Italy, then we would have a problem because he doesn't really uproot himself or subdue himself because he's basically the king of that diocese.
39:17
What we'll find when we go through our analysis of how Roman Catholicism, particularly the pope at Rome, the bishop at Rome, subdued three kings, we'll walk through Milan, Alexandria, and Antioch, and show how each one in succession had a primacy of which
39:37
Rome would be jealous and therefore Rome had to remove it from the equation.
39:43
And we're going to walk through that in a second. But I think something that will be very interesting to our listeners is that this is about the time, this latter part of the 4th century, is about the time that the bishops of the empire began to take on increasing civil responsibilities.
40:04
And this is what led them to become a civil power to be reckoned with throughout the empire.
40:12
And what we find is by the end of the 4th century, the whole empire is basically being ruled by monks and bishops. And that's the civil power that we were supposed to watch out for because this little horn in Daniel chapter 7 was going to come up and take civil power.
40:28
And so we're going to look at both of those things. When did Roman Catholicism become a civil power and when did Roman Catholicism subdue three kings?
40:35
But let's start with Roman Catholicism being a civil power. It began, although I'm going to mention
40:44
Constantine, but this isn't this wasn't the beginning of the little horn. This was just the church doing something that it shouldn't have done, and that is it became a servant to the state.
40:56
And what happened is that Constantine, in addition to reorganizing the empire, also reformed the judiciary.
41:03
What was happening is that the emperor's throne was being constantly bothered by all sorts of administrative appeals of rulings from lower courts.
41:15
And so there's just a long line of people trying to get to the emperor to ask him to consider an appeal of a lower court's ruling.
41:23
And what happened in this process is that Constantine ended up conscripting the bishops of the empire to aid him in handling all these appeals.
41:34
And so what happened is the church started accepting appeals and listening to them.
41:41
And if you look at the Council of Sardica in 344 AD, you have a very clear case of the bishops of the empire trying to deal with the fact that the emperor had conscripted them to handle legal issues.
41:58
And they were required it was a tedious and complicated process and they were required to write down everything all evidence and all opinions had to be written down and forwarded to the court for approval.
42:08
And so the bishops had become entangled in legal obligations that consumed their time and resources. And they began to pull them away from their responsibility to basically be administering the word to Christ's sheep.
42:21
And they began to handle legal cases for the emperor. Now also under Emperor Constantine the church began to be viewed as a conduit for distributing the state's welfare.
42:33
Early in the process the obligations that came with the function were considered an imposition.
42:40
And they were not considered an honor. They were basically a disruption and they were not welcomed.
42:47
The emperor, for example, had decreed that all funerals had to be administered by the church and established that all revenues for the services of funerals must be paid directly to the church.
42:58
That's from SP Scott's The Civil Law Volume 16.
43:04
It's a very interesting read about the enactments of Justinian who said that they were going to start using the church to distribute welfare.
43:14
Constantine had also sent grain to the church in Alexandria for the support of certain widows. Now taking care of widows was the church's responsibility but the emperor got involved in that.
43:24
And he said it also says that he sent abundant provisions for the necessities of the poor to the church in Heliopolis.
43:33
And this was all born of good intentions, but the actions were initially interpreted as trouble and a pretense to the early
43:40
Christian writers. I'm citing, for example, Athanasius in his Apology of Contra Arianos, the
43:45
Apology Against the Arians, Part 1, Chapter 1, Paragraph 18, and Eusebius, The Life of Constantine, Book 3,
43:52
Chapter 58. These guys are writing about the largest of the state basically jumping on the bandwagon of caring for the poor and thus using the bishops of the church to distribute welfare.
44:04
And so the church obliged the emperor. I'm sure it was largely out of respect to the emperor, trying to honor the king and basically show respect to him, but it was by no means considered a scriptural obligation and certainly wasn't part of the bishop's responsibilities.
44:22
And this wasn't going to end well. Now this is, again, this early 4th century, mid -4th century, the church is doing its best to obey the emperor, handle cases that are being litigated, manage the appeals process for the emperor and forward opinions to him for final consideration, or distribute his largesse and his generosity to the widows and the poor.
44:44
And it didn't take long for those who became entangled in the state welfare function to realize just how influential and wealthy they could become by performing the service on behalf of the emperor.
44:56
George of Alexandria, for example, had used his position to corner the market on funerals and made a profit on every corpse that was buried.
45:03
That's from Epiphanius Panarion 3 .1 .76 and 1 .5
45:09
-6. This is Epiphanius writing in the latter part of the 4th century, complaining that George of Alexandria was making a lot of money because the emperor had decided that the church had to handle funerals.
45:22
And what happened is that the churches became distribution centers where the poor of the city gathered to receive their daily provisions from the hands of the bishop who himself had received it from the emperor.
45:34
And the bishop thus aggregated to himself a considerable following in the city. And if you think about what happens in today's modern welfare state, is that whoever is the conduit through which that generosity of the state is delivered, ends up owning the process and basically can control the people for whom the goods and wares are finally intended.
45:58
It marries the church to a secular administrative process and the only way that can end is with utter compromise of the responsibilities of the bishops to care properly for the poor.
46:11
So what happens is that as the bishops become the place and the means, the residence of the bishop or the church where the bishop presides becomes the distribution center and as people were attracted to these distribution centers the poor became basically they began to be mobilized as part of a symbolic retinue of the bishop.
46:36
They basically followed him around and their presence in the bishop's following along with that of monks and consecrated virgins symbolized the unique texture of the bishop's power.
46:50
This work that was being done on behalf of the emperor ended up aggregating to the bishop all sorts of power and a following and in fact what we find is that the works of the bishops to distribute the largest of the state didn't really alleviate the condition of the poor but it carried a clear emotional message that was closely watched by contemporaries and being made visible the poor were also made amenable to control.
47:18
So what we have is as the bishops begin to take on state responsibilities that are assigned by the emperor they begin to have a following of people who can be controlled and what we find is that control rather than charity was the effect of the bishops becoming the quote lovers of the poor and the administrators of the civil welfare state.
47:41
They began to control the poor as a demographic instead of as people who they were to care for and shepherd and what happens when you have a group of people like that, they can be mobilized to do the bishops bidding and in fact that's what we find.
47:57
Ambrose wrote in the latter part of the fourth century saying that he could calm disturbances but he could also incite them if he wanted, if he was moved by if the church was moved by some offense against God or an insult to the church.
48:10
That's from Ambrose chapter epistle 40 paragraph 6. So here we have bishops in the latter part of the fourth century recognizing that they're beginning to wield a tremendous power and what's interesting is we end up seeing this this tendency of bishops to begin to control crowds of people because they've been entangled in the welfare state and what happens is that those people begin to be a mob that basically becomes an urban militia that operates at the back and call of the bishop in the metropolitan cities.
48:55
And so I'm quoting from Brown's book here, it's page 103 Peter Brown in his 1988 historical lectures at the
49:03
University of Madison Power and Persuasion in Late Antiquity is published by the
49:08
University of Wisconsin in 1992. He talks about bishops being considered lovers of the poor but in fact that was just a euphemism because in fact he was as Brown shows that they became conduits of the welfare state and they had assembled to themselves a large following but did not really alleviate their condition as poor people and destitute people but rather aggregated to himself what became an urban militia.
49:37
And so reading from that from Brown now notice that he's describing he says this is happening everywhere in the empire but he said basically the most prominent examples can be found in Alexandria, Antioch, and Rome.
49:51
So here I'm quoting from Brown now it says, while the patriarch of Alexandria became notorious for his use of such groups he was by no means alone.
50:01
The patriarch of Antioch also commanded a threatening body of lecticarii or pallbearers for the burial of the urban poor.
50:10
The extensive development of the underground cemeteries of the Christian community in Rome, the famous catacombs from the early 3rd century onwards placed at the disposal of the bishop a team of fossores or gravediggers skilled in excavating the
50:23
Tufa rock. As strong and as pugnacious as were the legendary Durham coal miners who intervened in the rowdy elections of the 19th century.
50:31
During the disputed election in which Damascus became bishop of Rome in 366 AD, the fossores played a prominent role in a series of murderous assaults on the supporters of his rival.
50:42
Throughout the empire the personnel associated with the bishop's care of the poor had become a virtual urban militia.
50:49
And that's Brown, citing from Brown on page 103. So, the civil power as manifested by the bishops and monks began to rule the empire.
51:02
And this is a citation from Edward Gibbon in his Rise and Fall of the
51:07
Roman Empire, and this is quoting from volume 3. He describes a situation at the end of the 4th century when the emperor outlawed pagan religions and what resulted was that bishops led armies out onto the field to destroy the pagans and remove their temples.
51:22
And so this is quoting from Gibbon's Rise and Fall. It says the laws of the emperors exhibit some symptoms of a milder disposition, but their cold and languid efforts were insufficient to stem the torrent of enthusiasm and rapine which was conducted, or rather impelled by the spiritual rulers of the church.
51:44
In Gaul, the Holy Martin, bishop of Tours, marched at the head of his faithful monks to destroy the idols, the temples, and the consecrated trees of his extensive diocese.
51:55
The prudent reader will judge whether Martin was supported by the aid of miraculous powers or of carnal weapons.
52:02
In Syria, the divine and excellent Marcellus, resolved to level with the ground the stately temples within the diocese of Apamea, took the field in person against the powers of darkness.
52:13
A number of troops of soldiers and gladiators marched under the episcopal banner and he successively attacked the villages and country temples of the diocese of Apamea.
52:23
Now, I want to ask our listeners to think about the urban militia that had been aggregated to the bishops of Rome and Antioch and Alexandria, and the description of Martin of Tours leading monks into battle under his banner, and Marcellus leading soldiers and gladiators into battle under his banner, and ask is this the religion that Jesus founded?
52:55
And the answer is a resounding no. And yet, this is the condition of the church or what was called the church at the latter part of the 4th century.
53:08
And what we see unfolding before us is that the church has gone from being a church that shepherds the sheep, ministers to the needy, cares for the widows, preaches the gospel to the world, and looks after the destitute, and it became an administrative function of the empire, handling judicial appeals, handling distribution of the welfare state, handling funerals throughout the empire, with decrees from the emperor that they be paid directly for their services, and what happens?
53:53
The bishops, of course, are unable to resist the carnality of such a role, and by the latter part of the 4th century, they begin to make huge amounts of money on funerals, they're the channels through which welfare is distributed, they gather to themselves people under the auspices of care for the poor, when in fact what they've done is gather to themselves an urban militia, and that urban militia gets led into battle under their banner to destroy the pagans and their temples.
54:24
And I look at this and I think, is this the heavenly kingdom that Christ came to establish?
54:30
And the answer is no, it's not. The important thing for us to see is, and this is what is reported in the historical record, and nobody denies this, the fact is by the latter part of the 4th century, the church had taken on the civil sword of the emperor, and it was only a few years earlier that the emperor himself had declared that Roman Catholicism was the religion of the empire, and eventually the emperor basically abdicated the title
55:02
Pontifex Maximus, and it was shortly after that that the bishop of Rome started taking on that title.
55:08
So, the question that we started with, at least in this section, was when did the
55:13
Roman Catholic Church become a civil power? And that occurred in the latter part of the 4th century, and you can hear it in the reports of the historians, whether it's
55:23
Gibbon or Brown talking about what was happening in the Roman Empire at the latter part of the 4th century, when the bishops, who initially started just wanting to help the emperor distribute food for the poor or handle his huge caseload, ended up with such power in the empire that they were able to basically conscript an urban militia to do their bidding, and basically they ended up doing much more than the emperors even wanted them to, going out into the countryside and destroying all the temples, and basically persecuting the heathen, as it were, and that wasn't necessarily the role that had been assigned to the church to take on that civil power.
56:03
So, the next question we wanted to get to is that how did Rome subdue three kings in the process, because we talked about the
56:13
Roman Catholic Church uprooting three horns, and we're referring to the diocese of Italy, Egypt, and the
56:21
East, as they were ruled from their three capitals of Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch.
56:32
But I want to pause just briefly to go back to something I said at the very beginning, that for the brief period from 296
56:38
A .D. to the latter part of the 4th century, it was Milan, not Rome, that was the chief metropolis of the diocese of Italy.
56:47
So, in order to aggregate the sea of one, as the several popes referred to it, and we talked earlier about the popes describing the sea of one, or the church being founded on Peter, and therefore
57:01
Peter, and his three locations that were influenced by him, either in person or by his disciple
57:06
Mark, must therefore be the foundation of the church. When did the bishop of Rome subdue three kings?
57:15
And that happened at the latter part of the 4th century, and by kings, we're using kings in the sense that Daniel did in Daniel 7, and also in Daniel 8.
57:25
The king is a geographic, sometimes a geographic entity, it is sometimes a political entity, sometimes it's a personal entity.
57:34
And we know that because when we look at the goat of Daniel chapter 8, the angel tells
57:42
Daniel that the goat is the king of the Greeks, and the horn between its eyes is its first king.
57:51
And then it says that the horn is broken and four kings come up in its place, and then out of one of those horns, a king comes up who does some things.
57:58
And we'll talk about Daniel chapter 8 a little bit later, but we're talking about administrative and civil power in the
58:05
Roman Empire, and what we find is that by the end of the 4th century that is devolved to the bishops in the chief metropolis of the diocese, and the question is at what point did the bishop of Rome subdue three kings?
58:21
We'll start with Milan. Milan was, as I mentioned, from 296
58:27
A .D. to the latter part of the 4th century was considered the chief metropolis of the diocese of Italy.
58:33
Athanasius refers to it that way twice in his History of the Arians, part 4, chapter 33.
58:40
And he also refers to it that way in Apologia di Fuga, which is basically his explanation for his flight in chapter 4.
58:49
So we can see from the historical records, both in the civil and the ecclesiastical realm, that Rome did not start out as the chief metropolis of the diocese of Italy after Diocletian reorganized the empire.
59:02
And yet today, the bishop of Rome is addressed as the primate of Italy. The fact is for the bulk of the 4th century the bishop of Rome was not considered the bishop of the metropolis.
59:15
It was not considered the bishop of Italy. He was considered the bishop of Rome, whereas the bishop of Milan was considered the bishop of Italy.
59:25
So when did Rome supplant Milan as the chief metropolis? Well, that happened in 378
59:31
A .D. And what happened is at a council of Rome in 378, a letter of petition was sent to the emperors
59:39
Gratian and Valentinian II, requesting that they recognize and enforce a policy that all metropolitan bishops, including that of Milan, were to subordinate themselves to Rome.
59:50
The letter specifically names the civil vicar of Italy in Milan as an officer who may arrest uncooperative metropolitan bishops and bring them to Rome for trial.
01:00:00
So here we have the bishop of Rome appealing to the emperor, asking that he assist in subordinating
01:00:07
Milan to the city of Rome. And sure enough by the end of the 4th century, Rome again is the chief metropolis of the city, of the
01:00:15
Diocese of Italy. So Milan was the first king that needed to be subdued. In the
01:00:22
Diocese of Italy, Milan had the primacy, and that primacy was not something that Rome could share, and so Rome ends up subordinating
01:00:31
Milan to itself, and that happened in 378 A .D. So with the
01:00:36
Diocese of Italy safely under his belt, only Alexandria and Antioch stood in the way of the Roman bishop's ambition, and so there were two problems with Alexandria and Antioch.
01:00:48
The problem with Alexandria was that in the eyes of the emperor, the city of Alexandria stood eye to eye to Rome, with Rome in stature.
01:00:57
When the emperor declared Roman Catholicism to be the official religion of the Empire in his
01:01:03
Decree De Fide Catholica, he identified it as the religion of both the pontiff in Rome and the bishop of Alexandria.
01:01:12
That was a status that Rome could not long share with another bishop. The problem with Antioch was that there yet existed a perception that Peter had begun his ministry first in Antioch, and therefore
01:01:26
Antioch actually had the chronological primacy over Rome, at least in the sense of a timeline, because Peter had gone to Antioch first.
01:01:38
So for this reason, Antioch enjoyed some privileges on that account, and in fact Chrysostom, by the end of the 4th century, was still saying that Peter had been bid by the
01:01:49
Lord to tarry for a long time in Antioch. So you have Rome in a situation where from the perspective of the religion of the
01:01:58
Empire, it is listed on equal terms with Alexandria. When it comes to chronological primacy,
01:02:04
Antioch comes first before Rome, and when it comes to the primacy within the diocese of Italy, Milan had the primacy.
01:02:12
And Rome is facing three different cities with three different types of primacy, and Rome doesn't like that, and eventually what happens in response to Constantinople's claim that Constantinople should be second to Rome, the
01:02:30
Council of Rome responded in 382 AD with the theory of the three patrinces, or the three seats of Peter, saying that Rome, Alexandria, and Antioch were the three chief seats of the
01:02:42
Roman Catholic religion, and that among them, Rome was the chief. And so there we have, basically, that's our history, a very detailed history lesson into how the
01:02:56
Roman Catholic religion came up A little horn came up, subdued three kings, uprooted three horns, claimed them for himself, and then rose among the remaining ten to a civil prominence that ended up being the heir of the
01:03:16
Roman Empire, the successor to the pagan Roman Empire. Up came Roman Catholicism, claiming three of the horns of the divided
01:03:25
Roman Empire for itself, uprooting three horns, subduing three kings, and rising up among the remaining ten diocese.
01:03:33
And what's going to be, I think, probably the most difficult challenge for people to digest is that we're looking at the three patrine apostolic seats of Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria, which typically is viewed by church historians as the cradle of the church.
01:03:55
And yet, the thing that most church historians look back on with favor, trying to find the root and ground and the apostolic continuity of our religion, they always end up looking through the lens of Rome, Antioch, and Alexandria, which by then were the three metropolitan cities of the three dioceses of Italy, Egypt, and the
01:04:22
East, three of the thirteen dioceses of the Roman Empire. And as we see from the arguments of the bishops from 382 onward, the church was founded on Peter, Peter had established three apostolic seats, those three in three places are a sea of one, ruling jointly with the bishop of Rome in charge, and that was the fulfillment of Daniel's vision, that the
01:04:49
Roman Empire would eventually divide thirteen ways, a little horn would grab three of them and uproot them, subduing three kings in the process, and then arise among the remaining ten.
01:05:03
And that's what Daniel saw in Daniel chapter 7. So the question, where that leaves us now, is that,
01:05:11
I want to give a highlight of what we're going to be getting into next, because the question that is going to be raised from this, and actually there's a lot of questions that are going to be raised from this, but among the questions that must be raised, and in fact must be answered, are questions that originate in Daniel chapter 11.
01:05:34
And the reason this matters is because in Daniel chapter 11, it is largely assumed by most expositors that at some point in the chapter,
01:05:45
Daniel changes his frame of reference and stops talking about the divided Greek empire and started talking about some future
01:05:53
Antichrist that would be arising later. And they don't know exactly when that point is, but it's theorized anywhere from Daniel 11 .21
01:06:04
to Daniel 11 .39 when the future Antichrist is discussed. And what happens because of that is that, in addition to the mistake of looking for the
01:06:15
Antichrist to come up among ten and subdue three of the ten in the ten -way division of the
01:06:22
Roman Empire, people also expect Antichrist to erect the abomination of desolation, and they also expect him to invade
01:06:30
Egypt. And I can say that the bishop of Rome, to my knowledge, has never invaded
01:06:36
Egypt, and he did not set up the abomination of desolation. In fact, the little horn of Daniel 7 was never predicted or prophesied to invade
01:06:47
Egypt or set up the abomination of desolation. But because there is an assumption on the changing frame of reference in Daniel chapter 11 that leads people to expect that the little horn would come up in Daniel chapter 7 and then set up the abomination of desolation described in Daniel chapter 8 and Daniel chapter 11 and Daniel chapter 9 and also invade
01:07:11
Egypt because the last six verses of Daniel chapter 11 have an antagonist, the king of the north invading
01:07:16
Egypt. Roman Catholicism, again, gets a pass because they never invaded
01:07:22
Egypt. And in fact, that would be one of the arguments they use against being identified as the little horn of Daniel 7 because they aren't the guy that invades
01:07:30
Egypt at the end of Daniel chapter 11. And so what we're going to do is show that the historical attempt to find the
01:07:40
Antichrist in Daniel chapter 11 has led to us missing the rise of this little horn of Roman Catholicism in the latter part of the 4th century and in fact prohibited people from actually identifying the
01:07:55
Roman Catholic Church as the beast of Revelation 13 for many centuries beyond that because they were looking for a 10 -way division and what happened was a 13 -way division and then when they did finally begin to identify
01:08:06
Roman Catholicism as Antichrist they were expecting him to invade Egypt and he never did and it was never predicted to do and so we'll talk about that in our next episode.
01:08:17
Alright, well there you have it. Man, I don't even know what to say.
01:08:23
I've got nothing to add to that. I really appreciate you coming on, Tim. I just want to say thank you for all the work that you've put into this.
01:08:31
So we are going to continue this series. We're going to continue.
01:08:36
Tim is going to be coming on a lot more frequently now. We are looking at possibly a 20 episodes out of this or 30 episodes.
01:08:47
We don't know how long this is going to take but I really, really want to give
01:08:54
Tim the opportunity to present this stuff on Semper Reformanda Radio and I'm so grateful that he's partnering with us and listen, we know that this stuff there's a lot to this so if you have questions, comments, or concerns or if you want to just shoot something out there, you can always email us at Semper .Reformanda
01:09:18
.Radio at gmail .com So Tim, I want to say thanks again for coming on.
01:09:25
Thank you, Tim. It's been a pleasure. We'll see everybody next week. Alright, God bless. Talk to you then.